BRITAIN’S ARMY

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4300, 8 March 1901, Page 5

BRITAIN’S ARMY

administration of the WAR OFFICE. MILITARY OR CIVILIAN CONTROL. SPEECH BYLORD SALISBURY. LONDON, March 6. In. the course of the Army debate, which was quietly concluded in the House of Lords, the Earl of Northbrook declared that according to Order-in-Council the responsibility for the condition of the auxiliary forces rested with the Adjutant-General, who was responsible to the Secretary of State for War. Earl Spencer said the Commander-in-Chief’.s.duty was to give advice to the Secretary for War. If the Minister refused to accept it the responsibility rested with him. The Earl of Rosebery said that all the mistakes and frictions had originated through nominally retaining the Commander-In-Chief in the hierarchy while really reducing him - to a pale shadow. The only flaw in Lord Wolseley’s. speech was the recommendation to appeal to the public. “ The Times,” commenting on the debate, considers that real reform would be found in decentralisation downwards. Later.

In his speech in the House of Lords, the Earl of Rosebery suggested that a Secret Parliament Committee should systematically consult with representatives of the War Office and Admiralty with a view of .testing the efficiency of the forces.

In view' of the coming reform proposals to be introduced by the Right Hon W. St. J. Brodrick, Secretary of State for War, the Marquis bf , Lansdowne reserved his defence. The Duke of Devonshire, Lord President of the Council, complained of Lord Wolseley’s action in not indicating an instance wherein he found himself helpless, but doubtless Lord Wolseley would be given an opportunity' of replying when an inquiry into the operations w'as opened after the war. The Marquis of Salisbury, while , denying that the Marquis of Lansdowne intended) to make a personal attack upon Lord Wolseley, l emphasised the unaltered supremacy of the Secretary of State for War, acting on behalf of Par. liament, entire administration of the Army. This was a : bedrock circumstance of the Constitution, wherefrom it was impossible to depart. The results of the system, said the Marquis, depended not on the machine, but on the brilliancy and vigour, of the men employed'. i '''