Chapter XXXVI: Part VIII (2)

While the Commissioners were still engaged in their inquiries, the question of military education was frequently brought before the notice of Parliament in the course of the session of 1856, more particularly by Mr. Sidney Herbert, who, in an elaborate speech on the 5th of June, explained to the House of Commons the details of a general scheme of education for officers of all branches of the service, the outline of which he had previously sketched out while Secretary at War in 1854, in a letter to the Commander-in-Chief.

The subject of military education was one which at this time engaged the serious attention both of the Government and the public. Toward the close of the year, Major-General Lefroy (then Colonel Lefroy, and employed at the War Office as artillery adviser to the Secretary of State) was directed by Lord Panmure to draw up a general scheme for the education of officers; and numerous plans, with a similar object, were about the same period proposed for the consideration of the Secretary of State.

The military educational establishments which existed in 1856 were as follows:

The Royal Military College at Sandhurst, } Under the control of the
comprising a senior and junior department. } Commander-in-Chief.

The Royal Military Academy at Woolwich. }
The Ordnance School at Carshalton, a }
preparatory establishment to the Academy. } Under the control of the
The Department of Artillery Studies at } Clerk of the Ordnance.
Woolwich. }
The Royal Engineer Establishment at }
Chatham. }

The East India Military College at { Under the Court of
Addiscombe. { Directors of the
{ East India Company.

The School of Musketry at Hythe. { Under the control of the
{ Commander-in-Chief.

The Royal Military Asylum at Chelsea, }
comprising a training school for army } Under the control of the
schoolmasters, and a model school for } Deputy Secretary of War.
children. }
The Royal Hibernian School at Dublin. }

Garrison and regimental schools for } Under the control of the
soldiers and children. } Chaplain-General.

Up to this period no systematic organization for the direction of military education had prevailed in this country; the various educational establishments were under the control of separate departments, and no single authority exercised any general supervision over them. The appointment of a Director-General of Military Education had been already advocated in Parliament by Mr. Sidney Herbert, and the institution of a special department to superintend the whole system of education for the army was one of the main features both of Colonel Lefroy’s and of all the other schemes brought under the consideration of Lord Panmure at this period.

The Commissioners appointed in 1856, after having visited the military schools of the Continent, presented their Report in January, 1857. In this Report, although their instructions had more particularly directed their attention to the training of officers for the scientific corps, they touched upon several points connected with the education of officers of the army generally. One of the changes most strongly recommended by them was the formation of a special Board of Military Education. “We consider it of the first importance,” their Report says, “that military education in this country should be regarded as a whole, and that perfect unity of system and harmony in its working should be made to prevail. This, we conceive, can only be done by bringing military education generally under the control of one head, the Secretary of State for War; and to effect this, a Board or Section of Military Education should be formed, as part of the establishment of the War Office.” The Report adds: “The creation of such a Section appears to us far more important than any other single object we can recommend.” The Commissioners also stated that after careful consideration, they recommended the combined action of a Board in preference to the undivided authority of a single individual, on the ground of the variety of knowledge and experience required for the proper treatment of educational questions.

The appointment of the Council of Military Education was the first result of the recommendations of the Commissioners. Its institution was proposed in a letter from the Commander-in-Chief to the Secretary of State for War on the 6th of April, 1857, and as originally constituted, it consisted of the Commander-in-Chief as _ex officio_ president, a Major-General as vice-president, and two field officers as members. The appointment of the Council, although the members commenced their duties at once, was not officially gazetted until June.

The functions of the Council, however, did not in the first instance extend to a general superintendence over the whole system of military education. Almost simultaneously with their institution an Inspector-General of Army Schools was appointed under the Secretary of State for War, to whom the management of all institutions connected with the education of soldiers and children, which had previously been in the hands of the Chaplain-General, was entrusted. Nor was the supervision of the Council even over the education of officers at first general, as the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich remained under the management of the War Office (under which department it had been placed on the abolition of the office of Master-General of the Ordnance), and the examinations for admission to it were conducted by a separate Board of Examiners, under the superintendence of Canon Moseley.

The instructions issued to the Council on their first appointment directed their attention more especially to the organization of a Staff College, the revision of the system of examinations for direct appointments to the army, the amalgamation of Woolwich and Sandhurst, and the professional instruction and examination of officers after entering the service. On all these questions they submitted reports in the course of the year, and at the beginning of 1858 they commenced to conduct the examinations in connection with the Staff College and the Cadet College at Sandhurst, although these establishments were not formally put under their authority until, by a Royal Warrant of the 1st of October, 1858, the Council were appointed Visitors of the Royal Military College. The examinations of officers for direct appointments to the staff, which had been instituted in 1857, were also placed under the superintendence of the Council in 1858; but at a later period, the portion of these examinations which has more especial reference to matters of drill and regimental duty was, on the recommendation of the Council themselves, removed from their control, with the view of its being conducted by a Board of Officers appointed by the Adjutant-General.

At the beginning of the year 1858, the office of Secretary to the Council of Military Education was created, and in June of the same year an augmentation of their number took place by the addition of two new members,--one a field officer, the other a civilian, the Rev. Canon Moseley. The constitution of the Council as then fixed continues to the present day, and consists of the Commander-in-Chief as _ex officio_ president, a vice-president, and four members, one being a civilian.

The appointment of a civilian as a member of the central Board of Military Education had been recommended by the Commissioners of 1856, on the ground of the close connection between military and civil educational questions. The decision to carry out this recommendation, simultaneously with an augmentation in the strength of the Council, appears to have been connected with the determination arrived at, to place the superintendence of the Academy at Woolwich--the competitive examinations for admission to which had hitherto been conducted by Canon Moseley--in the hands of the Council. They were formally appointed Visitors of the Academy in August, 1858, their control over the education of the officers of the army being now made almost entirely general. The powers of the Council, however, in regard to Woolwich appear, probably from the fact of their not being defined by Royal Warrant, to be theoretically somewhat less extensive than those possessed by them over Sandhurst, as the recommendation of the appointment of professors, which in the case of the latter college is formally vested in the Council, is at the Academy left to the Lieutenant-Governor.

In October, 1859, the Indian Military College at Addiscombe was placed under the supervision of the Council, and the examinations for admission to it were conducted by them until the close of the establishment in 1861.

In 1860, the superintendence of army schools, garrison libraries, recreation rooms, the Royal Military Asylum at Chelsea, and the Royal Hibernian School at Dublin, were transferred from the Secretary of State for War to the Council.

In 1864, the Advanced Class of Artillery Officers, on its institution, was placed under the control of the Council. Since this date the whole system of army education has been superintended by that body, with the exception of the examinations of officers for promotion, the School of Musketry at Hythe, and the more peculiarly regimental institutions which exist in the Department of Artillery Studies, the School of Gunnery at Shoeburyness, and the School of Military Engineering at Chatham, for the special instruction of officers of the scientific corps. The Survey Class at Aldershot, though not formally is indirectly subject to their supervision.

1. ORGANIZATION AND DUTIES IN 1869.

The Council of Military Education consists of the Duke of Cambridge, Field Marshal Commanding-in-Chief, _President_; Major-General W. C. E. Napier, _Vice-President_; Major-General Sir Fred. Abbott, of the Royal Engineers; Col. Pocklington and Col. Hamley, of the Royal Artillery; Rev. Canon Moseley, civilian; and Capt. Greentree, _Secretary_.

_Military Schools and Examinations._

1. To recommend to the Commander-in-Chief, and the Secretary of War,
gentlemen for the appointment of examiners in the army examinations.

2. To recommend professors and instructors for the Advanced Class of Artillery Officers, the Staff College, the Royal Military Academy, and the Royal Military College.

3. To examine, by means of their staff of examiners, officers for direct appointment to the staff, chiefly the personal staff, and aids-de-camp and assistant military secretaries.

4. To examine officers of artillery for admission to the Advanced
Class, and for certificates on quitting it.

5. To examine officers for admission to the Staff College, probationarily after a year’s residence, and for qualification for the general staff on quitting the College.

6. To examine candidates for admission to the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, and for qualification for commissions in the Royal Artillery and in the Royal Engineers on quitting that establishment.

7. To examine candidates for admission to the Royal Military College at Sandhurst, and for qualification for commissions in the army on their quitting the College.

8. To examine candidates for direct commissions in the cavalry,
guards, and line.

9. To visit the several military colleges whenever they consider it
desirable.

10. To report to the Commander-in-Chief on all questions connected with the education of candidates for the army, or with the educational departments of the several military schools.

_Army Schools, Regimental and Garrison Libraries and Reading Rooms._

1. To receive and consider all applications for training schoolmasters or schoolmistresses; the usual course of procedure in these cases is annexed.

2. The appointment of trained schoolmasters and schoolmistresses,
according to the regulations.

3. The appointment of acting schoolmasters and schoolmistresses, when
trained masters and mistresses cannot be provided.

4. The appointment of civilian schoolmasters in embodied regiments of
militia under special regulations as annexed.

5. The transfers of schoolmasters and schoolmistresses from one
regiment or garrison school to another, as circumstances may require.

6. Promotion of schoolmasters and schoolmistresses from one class to
another according to the regulations.

7. To receive and consider all communications from commanding officers on matters relating to the appointment of schoolmasters and schoolmistresses their discipline, application for leave to marry, furlough, etc.

8. To receive the monthly report of schools, prescribed by Article 16 of the Schools Regulations, and to consider the same, and take such proceedings thereon as may appear necessary.

9. The periodical inspection of all military schools, and of the Royal
Military Asylum, Chelsea, and the Royal Hibernian School, Dublin.

10. To provide for and superintend the half yearly examination at the
Royal Military Asylum, Chelsea.

11. The supply of suitable apparatus for the illustration of lectures for the instruction and entertainment of soldiers, according to the rules laid down by the Secretary of State.

12. The general supervision of regimental and garrison libraries and
reading rooms.

13. To consider applications for, and appoint librarians at rates of
pay previously authorized by the Secretary of State.

14. To supply games, and other authorized articles for reading rooms,
according to the rules annexed.

15. To receive the quarterly reports of the state of barrack libraries in duplicate, and to consider any recommendation which maybe made therein; one copy to be forwarded to the Secretary of State for War, with the recommendations of the Council recorded thereon, should any be necessary.

16. To make out requisitions upon the War Office for additions to libraries, when necessary, within the annual amount granted by Parliament.

17. To receive and consider the half yearly reports of artillery and engineer libraries in duplicate, in aid of which a grant of money will be made annually to each brigade of artillery and company of engineers by the Secretary of State, on the recommendation of the Council of Military Education; one copy to be forwarded to the Secretary of State, with any remarks thereon which may appear called for, the other to be retained by the Council.

18. Hospital libraries and the schools and libraries of disembodied
regiments of militia will remain under the Secretary of State for War.

19. Upon all matters connected with either schools or libraries, not specified above, and which may involve expense, reference should be made to the Secretary of State for War, previously to any decision being arrived at.

EXAMINATIONS FOR COMMISSIONS AND PROMOTIONS.

I. EXAMINATIONS FOR DIRECT COMMISSIONS.

HISTORICAL NOTICE.

Previously to the year 1849, no educational qualifications were required as a condition of obtaining a commission, except from officers appointed to the scientific corps--admission to which could only be obtained by passing through the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich--and from the small proportion of officers, scarcely amounting, at that time, to one sixth of the whole number annually obtaining commissions, who entered the other branches of the service from the Royal Military College at Sandhurst. Examinations for admission to the army generally were first instituted by the Duke of Wellington, when Commander-in-Chief, in 1849. The examination, in addition to general subjects of elementary education, included the professional subject of fortification, in which the candidate was required to have read some easy work on the subject, and to have received some instruction in drawing. This requirement was subsequently somewhat modified; and the knowledge of fortification afterward exacted from a candidate was, “to be able to trace upon paper, in presence of the examiners, a front of fortification according to Vauban’s first system, and also the profile of a rampart and parapet.” In other subjects, modifications were also introduced; but the general character of the examinations remained much the same as originally established, and the regulations introduced by the Duke of Wellington, in 1849, continued substantially in force, until the general revision of the system of military education, which took place in 1857. It appears, however, from the evidence given by Lord Panmure, before the Royal Commission on the Purchase System, that, during the Crimean war, the stringency of the examinations was very much relaxed.

The examinations were held at Sandhurst by the professors of the College, in the presence of the Lieutenant-Governor, and were conducted to a great extent _vivâ voce_. The Select Committee of the House of Commons on Sandhurst (1855) did not make any recommendation in regard to these examinations, but stated in their report that in the only branch of the examination which was of a military character, namely, fortification, the knowledge required would easily be mastered in a week. The character of the examination, however, appears to have been very generally regarded with dissatisfaction. Mr. Sidney Herbert, when Secretary at War, in 1854, criticised it severely, as being “too technical, too limited, and within its limits too severe,” and as leading necessarily to a candidate cramming up a few books which happened to be in use at Sandhurst, without affording any test of general education. He contemplated at that time a revision of the examinations, and the institution of a special board of examiners, in place of the Sandhurst professors, for the purpose of conducting them; and the Treasury, in connection with this subject, suggested that the machinery proposed for the object in view should be combined, as far as practicable, with that about to be established for examining candidates for the Civil Service.

The outbreak of the Crimean war prevented Mr. Sidney Herbert’s proposals, which were connected with a general plan for the instruction of officers, from being carried into effect; and in 1856, Lord Panmure, before the Purchase System Commission, spoke of the defects of the existing examinations in nearly the same terms as those used by Mr. Herbert in 1854. After stating that they led to a system of cramming up particular books, he laid down the principle that the examination “should be such as young men may be supposed capable of passing without having any particular professional education. It ought to be upon general subjects, such as a young man ought to become acquainted with during his passage through any high educational establishment in this country.”

The various schemes for the reorganization of military education brought under the notice of Lord Panmure, at the end of 1856, proposed improvements in the system of examinations for admission to the army; and nearly all the authorities consulted on the subject at that time appear to have concurred in the opinion that the examinations should be strictly non-professional, and should be confined to requiring proof on the part of the candidates of a knowledge of the ordinary subjects of liberal education. The commissioners appointed in the same year to consider the training of officers for the scientific corps also recommended that the examination of candidates for commissions, who did not pass through a military college, should be of a general, and not of a special, character.

The Council of Military Education, on their appointment, in April, 1857, were instructed “to revise the whole system of examination for direct appointments to the army,” which is at present very defective; and this subject was, in fact, the first of those referred to in their instructions which they were directed to take into consideration. After consultation with the head masters of some of the chief public schools of the country, with the view of ascertaining the amount of knowledge which might fairly be expected from young men of 17, the Council proposed a scheme of examination based on the fundamental principle that the examination should be entirely non-professional, and confined to subjects which form the course of ordinary liberal education at civil schools. Regulations founded upon the proposal of the Council were issued on the 1st of August, 1857, and it was announced that they would come into operation at the beginning of 1858. These regulations were subsequently modified in some of their details, even before the first examination was held under the new system; further modifications have been from time to time introduced in them, without, however, affecting their general character; and the scheme proposed by the Council of 1857 has, in its main principles, formed the basis of all the regulations under which examinations for direct commissions have been held to the present time.

It appears, however, from the evidence given before the Commission of 1869, that it has been found necessary, from time to time, to diminish the difficulty of the examinations, owing to the number of failures among the candidates, and that the present standard is considerably lower than that originally established. An acquaintance with French, English history and geography, and drawing, was at first an indispensable condition of qualification, but is now no longer required; the obligatory subjects of examination have thus been reduced from five to two--mathematics and English--while, at the same time, the amount of mathematical knowledge formerly exacted has been reduced.

The first examination under the new system took place in February, 1858. Even before this, at the end of 1857, the place of examination had been transferred from Sandhurst to London, and the method of conducting the examinations by printed papers, instead of by _vivâ voce_, had been adopted. The examinations have, ever since that period, been conducted by examiners appointed by the Council of Military Education, and have, as a rule, been held half yearly. By a regulation which has been for some years in force, candidates for direct commissions are also permitted to be examined at foreign stations. The examination is, in this case, conducted in the presence of a board appointed by the officer commanding the station; but the method of examination is, in all other respects, identical with that adopted at home. The examination papers are forwarded by, and the candidates’ replies are returned to, the Council of Military Education.

The plan proposed by the Council was intended to regulate admission to the army in ordinary times of peace; but almost immediately after it had been formally approved, and before it had actually come into operation, the pressure occasioned by the outbreak of the Indian Mutiny led to an abnormal condition of circumstances. In September, 1857, a circular was issued, announcing that commissions would be given without examination on the condition of the applicant raising a certain number of recruits. In March, however, of the following year, this temporary measure was abolished, the pressure for troops being no longer such as to render its continuance necessary. Since that period no candidates, with the exception of graduates of the universities, have obtained commissions without passing the regular examination.

Before 1862, candidates were eligible for commissions without purchase, on passing the examination for direct appointments. Since that year, however, all free commissions have been reserved for cadets at Sandhurst, and those who pass the direct examination have only obtained commissions by purchase.

REGULATIONS IN FORCE IN 1869.

I. The examinations of candidates for direct commissions will be held in London at such periods as the exigencies of the service may require, and be conducted under the direction of the Council of Military Education by examiners appointed for the purpose. The number of candidates summoned to attend each examination will be limited to the requirements of the service.

II. The age of candidates examined for direct appointments will be, until further notice, from 17 to 20 years for the infantry, from 17 to 22 years for the cavalry, and from 17 to 26 years for colonial corps.

III. The candidate will be examined by a medical board, to ascertain that he is in every point of view, as regards his physical constitution, fit for military service.

He will be required to produce the following certificates, which must be forwarded to the Council of Military Education, 13 Great George street, S.W., as soon as possible after the receipt of the Military Secretary’s order to attend for examination:

(_a._) A certificate of baptism, or other satisfactory proof of his
age.

(_b._) A certificate from a minister of the church or of the denomination to which he belongs, that he has been duly instructed in the principles of religion.

(_c._) A certificate of good moral character, signed by a clergyman of the parish to which he belongs, or by the tutor or head of the school or college at which he has received his education, for at least the two preceding years; or such other proof of good moral character as will be satisfactory to the Commander-in-Chief.

(_d._) A statement of the subjects in which he wishes to be examined.

IV. The following will be the subjects of examination, but no candidate will be allowed to be examined in more than _five_ of these subjects.

Marks.
The classics { Latin, 2,000
{ Greek, 1,600
Mathematics, pure and mixed, 3,600
English language, 1,200
Modern languages (not including provincial dialects) each, 1,200
History, ancient and modern, with geography, 1,200
Natural sciences, _i.e._, mineralogy and geology, 1,200
Experimental sciences, _i.e._, chemistry, heat,
electricity, including magnetism, 1,200
Drawing, 600

V. Of the foregoing subjects, the elementary branches of mathematics and the English language, to the extent stated in the following paragraphs, will be considered obligatory:

1. In mathematics, 1,200 marks will be given to the following obligatory portions, viz., arithmetic, including vulgar and decimal fractions, proportion, extraction of the square root, and simple interest.

Algebra, including fractions, simple equations, and questions
producing them: Euclid, the first three books.

Of the 1,200 marks allotted to the foregoing portions of mathematics, 400 will be required for qualification, and of these at least 200 must be obtained in arithmetic.

2. In the English language, the candidate will be required to write correctly and in a good legible hand from dictation, and to compose grammatically. He will be required to obtain at least 200 marks in this subject.

3. Out of the remaining subjects the candidate may select any three.

4. No candidate will be allowed to count the marks gained in any one of the three voluntary subjects, unless amounting to one-sixth of the whole number of marks allotted to that subject; and for qualification, he will be required to obtain on his five subjects a total of 1,500 marks.

5. In the examination in classics, passages will be given for translation from the books usually read at schools; grammatical questions will be set, and English passages also given for translation into the Latin and Greek languages.

VI. The result of each examination will be reported to the Commander-in-Chief, and the names of any candidates who distinguish themselves will be specially brought to his notice.

VII. An unsuccessful candidate will not be debarred from applying to the Commander-in-Chief for permission to attend a future examination. No candidate, however, will be allowed more than three trials.

Should a candidate obtain only between 700 and 1,200 marks, he will not be allowed to present himself for reëxamination for at least six months. If he obtains less than 700 marks, a period of at least twelve months must elapse before he can be allowed to present himself again.

In all cases permission to be reëxamined must depend upon the number
of applicants on the list.

In subsequent examinations no credit will be given for the marks
gained by a candidate on former occasions.

In the event of a candidate not appearing for examination at the time appointed, such candidate will not be permitted to attend on the next occasion, and he will render himself liable to have his name either erased entirely or placed at the bottom of the list of those noted for examination.

VIII. A student at either of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, London, St. Andrew’s, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, or Queen’s University, Ireland, who shall have passed the examination necessary for taking a degree in arts, is qualified for a commission by purchase without being required to pass the foregoing examination, provided he is within the limits of 17 and 23 years of age if for the infantry, 17 and 25 years if for the cavalry, and of 17 and 28 years for colonial corps, and can produce the certificates marked (_a_), (_b_), and (_c_).

Such candidate must furnish a certificate of having graduated, or of having passed the examinations, signed by the Registrar of the University, and showing the date on which the examination took place.

On his application being approved, the candidate will receive an order
to be medically examined as to his physical fitness for the service.

The candidate will address his application, accompanied by the
necessary certificates, to the Military Secretary, Horse Guards.

III. PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION AS PREPARATORY TO MILITARY EXAMINATIONS.

A.--GENERAL NOTICE.

In connection with the Modern Departments, at some public schools, technical instruction in military subjects is actually at present given. This, for instance, is the case at Cheltenham College, the Modern Department at which appears, in fact, to have been originally instituted with the express object of affording means of special military education, and at the present day is officially called the “Military and Civil Department.” At one time, also, even at some schools in which Modern Departments did not exist, classes were formed in which instruction in military subjects was given to boys intended for the army. Both at Eton and at Harrow such classes existed, and fortification and military drawing were taught in them. The object of the formation of these classes appears in both cases to have been to enable boys to go up straight from school to the examinations for admission to the army, without the necessity of having recourse to private tuition. At the time of their institution a knowledge of fortification was required in the examination for direct commissions, and a candidate was therefore unable to present himself for this examination without some special preparation. At the commencement of 1858, however, the direct commission examinations were entirely remodelled; the small amount of fortification previously required was at that time excluded from the subjects of examination, which have ever since been of a non-professional character, and more or less such as enter into the course of ordinary liberal education. With the exclusion of technical subjects from the military examinations, the necessity for any special instruction in such subjects in candidates for admission to the army ceased. The military class at Harrow seems to have died out within a few years of its establishment; it has not been in existence during the last ten years and more. At Eton, though the corresponding class is still maintained, the teaching of technical military subjects in it has been abandoned. Even in the Modern Department at Cheltenham the instruction appears of late years to have become of a less decidedly military character than it originally was; and fortification, which was at one time taught at Wellington College, no longer enters into the course of instruction there. In the Modern Side, which has within the present year been established at Harrow, though partially intended, among other purposes, to assist the education of boys intended for the army, no attempt is made to give special military instruction.

The question of the possibility of affording an adequate military education at civil schools was fully discussed by the Commissioners appointed in 1856 to consider the training of officers for the scientific corps.

Having arrived at the conclusion that professional military education as hitherto given in this country has been begun at too early an age, we are met by what may be called the extreme opposite view, which would suggest the desirableness of giving up altogether education in military colleges previously to entering the army, or to entering a purely practical class or college for the special corps of Artillery and Engineers. An opinion appears to exist that the ordinary schools of the country are the best means of giving nearly the whole teaching of general and even military science which is desirable for all classes of officers before entering the army. It seems to be thought that not only modern languages and mathematics, but military history and topography are likely to be taught in such schools sufficiently for the highest military purposes, and that even young men intended for the special arms of the service may, on joining a military academy, be absolved, or almost entirely absolved, from any other studies than those included under the expression “_a purely practical course_.”

The Commissioners expressed their unhesitating dissent from this view. After pointing out the difficulties of giving at ordinary schools a complete preparation even in studies of a general preparatory character, such as modern languages and mathematics, and the still greater difficulties of teaching special subjects, like military history and topography, the Report proceeds:

Agreeing, therefore, as to the fact of a “sound general education being given by public schools,” we are unable to draw from it the conclusion that they will “give a specific military education.” They may indeed assist our military education, in a manner which the true sense of the term “sound general education” expresses, by encouraging preliminary tastes and studies, such as general history, mathematics, and modern languages, English included, to a greater extent than they do at present. But if there is such a thing as a science of war at all, it stands to reason that it can only be taught fully in cases where young officers have the passion and the capacity to begin it early, by its own teachers, and in its own place. The teachers should be practical men, as well as men of military science; the place a military college. And the great schools of the country will perform the same service to such an academy for young scientific officers as they do for places which give a specific education for other professions; they will _prepare for it_, but disclaim any attempt to _complete it_.

The Report of the Public Schools Commission does not appear to have made any direct reference to the question of the possibility of giving technical military instruction at civil schools; but the disinclination shown by the Commissioners to recommend even the general institution of “Modern Departments” would lead to the conclusion that they were not disposed to view with favor the introduction of any system of special instruction into the ordinary school course.

The question has been dealt with at considerable length in the evidence taken before the present Commission. In addition to the evidence given by Dr. Barry, Mr. Southwood, Dr. Benson, and Dr. Temple, to which particular reference is made in the Report, opinions on the subject were expressed by several military witnesses. Major-General Sir P. Herbert considers that all which is learnt at Sandhurst--all the knowledge requisite for a line officer--might equally well be acquired at a public school, if proper arrangements were made for teaching it. In his opinion fortification (including the practical construction of field-works), military drawing and surveying, military history and drill, could all be taught by military instructors at public schools without difficulty, and without interference with the subjects of general education. Major-General White considers that military history, modern languages, and drawing might be taught with advantage at public schools to boys intended for the army, although it would be difficult to teach the practical work of field fortification, artillery, and surveying. Colonel Baker appears to be of opinion that at the Universities, certainly, a special preliminary education might be given to candidates for the army, on a system similar to that which it was at one time proposed to introduce at Cambridge, but which does not appear to have ever been actually adopted. At the same time, though this instruction would be of a special character, Colonel Baker does not seem to contemplate its embracing strictly technical military subjects. On the other hand, His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge is of opinion that special military classes at public schools would fail; Major-General Sir F. Abbott thinks it unnecessary to establish such classes; Colonel Hort is decidedly opposed to an attempt to give military instruction at any but a military college, on the ground that it could not be so effectively given at a civil establishment, and would, moreover, interfere with the acquisition of a general education; and Lieut.-General Sir D. Cameron considers that it would be impossible for public schools to give a thorough or perfect knowledge of the practical subjects taught at Sandhurst, such as fortification, artillery, military drawing, and surveying.

In connection with the same subject suggestions have been made by some witnesses that the Government should assign a certain number of free commissions annually, as prizes to be competed for, either at particular public schools, or more generally amongst candidates educated at such schools. The institution of military exhibitions or scholarships at civil schools, and of military degrees at the Universities, has been also suggested. By some witnesses these proposals are advocated with the special view of inducing public schools to adopt a system of military instruction; by others with the more general object of holding out increased encouragement to enter the service to candidates who have had the advantage of a public school education.

Although the question of giving military instruction at public schools was not specially discussed by the Public School Commissioners, their attention was directed to the results of public school education in preparing candidates for the military examinations. Their Report speaks as follows in reference to this subject:

The number of public-school boys who enter the army is not large. Of 1,976 candidates for direct commissions within three years, 122 only had been at any of these schools. Of these 102 succeeded and 20 failed. It will be observed, on reference to the returns, that this proportion of failures is considerably below the average; the public school men, therefore, were better prepared than the general run of candidates. Of 96 who passed at their first examination, 38 came immediately from school, 58 had had intermediate tuition. Of the 20 who failed, 14 had had such tuition.

The public-school candidates for Sandhurst during the same period were 23 out of 375; the proportion who succeeded being here also above the average. Of 18 who succeeded, 11 came straight from school; of five who failed, only one.

The scheme of examinations for direct commissions, framed to meet the suggestions of the Head Masters of public schools, is simple and easy, and requires nothing that is beyond the reach of any boy of moderate industry and ordinary capacity; and it is clear that no boy, who will give himself a little trouble, needs to forego the wholesome influences of a great school for the sake of being “crammed” in the house of a tutor. The Sandhurst examination is also evidently within the reach of the schools.

The qualifying examination for Woolwich appears, before 1862, to have required an amount of mathematical knowledge difficult of attainment for a boy educated at a public school; but it underwent in that year some changes which have made it easier for candidates who have not received a special training. The obligatory mathematics do not now go beyond plane trigonometry; and a candidate need not obtain in them, to qualify, more than 700 marks out of 3,500; with this minimum, and with a fair proficiency in Latin, Greek, French, and geometrical drawing, he is entitled to enter into the competition. This standard is certainly not so high as to be inaccessible to a boy educated at a good public school, and from a table showing the working of the scheme at the examination of January, 1863, it appears that of the 20 successful competitors, 11 distinguished themselves in classics; the other marks were chiefly gained in mathematics and French. In three years, previous to this change, 35 public-school candidates passed and 49 failed to pass the qualifying examination, the totals being 545 and 689. Of the whole 84, two only went direct from the schools, and these failed.

In another passage the Commissioners say: “The main studies of the public schools being classical, it is obvious that, unless a due amount of weight is given to the classics in the Woolwich examinations, boys from those schools will not stand a fair chance in the competition. On the other hand, as it is of importance that the examinations should comprise other subjects besides classics, it is also obvious that unless the public schools provide a due amount of instruction in those other subjects, the candidates whom they send up must compete at a disadvantage. It is certain that there has hitherto been a want of adjustment between the Woolwich standard and the teaching of the public schools. The fault, we think, lies chiefly, though not wholly, in the deficiencies in the course of education pursued at the latter; and we are convinced that when these deficiencies have been supplied the difficulty which is now complained of will speedily disappear. But it is also to be observed, with respect to the Woolwich examinations themselves, that the scale of marks has lately (as we have already stated) undergone an alteration, which diminishes the amount of mathematical attainment required, and allows greater weight to classical scholarship. It appears probable that the Modern Departments at Cheltenham and Marlborough would not have been what they are had the old Woolwich standard, which is stated to have influenced them so strongly, been the same as the present; and probable, also, that they will hereafter feel the effects of the change which has been made in it.”

III. EXAMINATIONS FOR PROMOTIONS.

HISTORICAL NOTICE.

Examinations for promotion were for the first time instituted shortly after the introduction of examinations for admission to the army, by the Duke of Wellington when Commander-in-Chief, in the year 1850. A circular memorandum, published on the 14th of May of that year, announced that all officers would in future be subjected to an examination previously to promotion to the respective ranks of lieutenant and captain. The first examination was to be confined to subjects connected with the rudiments of drill, regimental duties, interior economy, and the Mutiny Act and Articles of War. The second examination for the rank of captain was in addition to extend to more general subjects, and to include geography, ancient and modern history, mathematics, and field and permanent fortification; but the examination in these subjects was not intended to affect lieutenants who had entered the service previously to 1849.

The examination for promotion to the rank of lieutenant was to be conducted regimentally by the commanding officer and the two next senior officers of the candidate’s regiment. The purely professional portion of the second examination, for the rank of captain, was to be conducted in the same manner; with regard to the mode of testing the candidates’ qualifications in the more general subjects required in this examination, it was stated that such orders would be given in each individual case as the Commander-in-Chief might think proper and necessary.

These regulations continued in force up to the time of the institution of the Council of Military Education in 1857, although it appears, both from official statements made by the Secretary at War, and from numerous expressions of opinion in Parliament between the years 1854 and 1857, that, at least so far as regarded the second examination for the rank of captain, little attempt was made, even nominally, to enforce the regulations. Mr. Sidney Herbert proposed, in 1854, in connection with his general scheme of military education, to remodel the examinations and to institute a special machinery for conducting them; and though no actual steps were taken to carry out his proposal, the necessity of making the examinations real and genuine tests of professional knowledge, and of enforcing strict qualifications for promotion, was frequently recognized in the numerous discussions which took place in Parliament on the subject of military education during the course of the Crimean War.

The Council of Military Education, on their appointment in 1857, were directed to consider the question of the professional examination of officers for promotion up to the rank of captain, and in the course of the year submitted a proposal on this subject, in connection with a scheme for providing instruction for officers after entering the service.

New regulations on the subject were issued on the 19th of July, 1858, which, while introducing little change in regard to the examination of cornets and ensigns, rendered a knowledge of mathematics, history, and fortification no longer requisite in the second examination for the rank of captain. Geography, on the other hand, was still retained among the subjects, and, as a condition of promotion to a captaincy, a lieutenant was required “to be able to state the general divisions of the world, the name of the capital of each nation in Europe, and the principal rivers, seaports, and military posts in Great Britain, Ireland, and Her Majesty’s Dominions in every part of the world.” The examinations of cornets and ensigns still continued to be conducted regimentally; that of lieutenants, so far as related to matters of regimental economy, detail, or discipline, was to be made by boards of officers appointed by the commanding officer at the station, consisting, when possible, of three senior officers not of the same corps as the candidate.

In November, 1858, revised regulations were issued, which, in accordance with the recommendations of the Council of Military Education, made considerable changes in the examinations, and placed them on their present basis. The subjects of regimental and ordinary duties on which candidates were to be examined were more minutely detailed than heretofore; the examinations were made entirely professional, geography being excluded from the second examination, and at the same time it was announced that lieutenants would be required to show a sufficient knowledge of reconnaissance and of field fortification. But the most important change made at this time was in regard to the mode of conducting the examinations, which were no longer to be carried on regimentally, but by a board appointed by the commanding officer of the district, consisting (if possible) of three field officers,--with the additional provision that in no case in which it could possibly be avoided, an officer of the same regiment as the candidate was to be a member of the board. Cornets and ensigns were to be required to pass the examination before completing eight months’ service; and, in order to give additional stringency to the regulations, it was announced that the Commander-in-Chief would “not hesitate to promote (either regimentally or from other corps) officers who may have passed the required examination, in place of the idle and incompetent.”

REGULATIONS IN FORCE IN 1869.

_Infantry and Cavalry._

159. Before officers are recommended for promotion to the rank of lieutenant, the commanding officer is to apply to the senior officer of the district or station for a board to examine and report upon their qualifications as under:

(_a._) They must have a thorough knowledge, and must give an account, of the duties they have to perform as regimental orderly officers, as officers commanding guards, or as subaltern officers of guards under officers of superior rank.

(_b._) They must have a thorough knowledge of, and be able to put a company through the various exercises and evolutions prescribed in the first two parts of the “Field Exercises of the Infantry;” and they must be acquainted with the rifle drill and practice, and the theoretical principles of musketry, as defined in the authorized book of instruction.

(_c._) They must know exactly the place of all the company officers in every situation of the battalion, and be able to command a company in battalion exercise.

(_d._) They must be acquainted with such parts of the Queen’s Regulations and Orders for the Army as relate to the duties, and conduct of a subaltern officer, and with the Mutiny Act and Articles of War, so far as is necessary for the performance of their duties as members of a court-martial.

(_e._) They must be acquainted with the regulations of the army in regard to the pay and messing of the troops, the supply of clothing and necessaries, and all details regarding the weight of, and mode of carrying, the various articles of the soldier’s kit, arms, accoutrements, and ammunition.

160. In addition to such portions of the foregoing as may apply to the cavalry service, it is necessary in the case of cornets recommended for promotion to the rank of lieutenant,--

(_a._) That they shall have learnt their foot drill and sword
exercise, and have been instructed in the single and double ride.

(_b._) That they shall be able to put a troop through the carbine, lance, and sword exercise, and to exercise both a squad and troop in the drill and evolutions prescribed in the Cavalry Exercise Book.

(_c._) That they shall be able to command a troop in squadron
exercise.

(_d._) That they shall have made themselves masters of the detail of saddlery, the mode of fitting the saddle, bridle, etc., and of the whole equipment of the cavalry soldier and his horse.

161. Lieutenants in the Cavalry and Infantry will, in addition to the foregoing, before they are recommended for promotion to the rank of captain, be required to show that they are further duly qualified as follows:

(_a._) They must have a thorough knowledge of the provisions of the Mutiny Act and Articles of War, and of the forms and proceedings of courts-martial, and must give evidence of having studied some of the standard works on military law.

(_b._) They must understand perfectly the evolutions of a regiment of cavalry or a battalion of infantry, as laid down in the regulations for those services respectively.

(_c._) They must be acquainted with the light infantry drill, duties
of outposts, patrols, escorts, advanced and rear guards.

(_d._) They must perfectly understand the interior economy of a
troop or company, and the established system of keeping their accounts.

(_e._) They must be thoroughly acquainted with the Queen’s and War
Office Regulations applicable to their own branch of the service.

(_f._) They must be competent to take charge of a troop, company, or
detachment, in every position in which it may be placed.

(_g._) And they will be required to show that they have a sufficient
knowledge of field fortification and reconnaissance.

162. The board of examination is to consist, if possible, of three field officers; but on no occasion, when it can be avoided, is any officer of the same regiment as the candidate to be a member. In all cases the board will ascertain by practical examination, as well as by verbal and written answers to questions, whether the officer is instructed in the subjects specified in the preceding paragraphs. The questions are to be written on half margin, and the replies written opposite to them. The board will mark in red ink its correction of any mistakes in the answers, and will certify in each case that “the candidate has not received any assistance from books or other sources.” The report of the board to be on a separate sheet, and when officers of different regiments are examined by the same board, the report in connection with each regiment is to be made separately.

163. The general officer commanding will forward the report of the board, and the written questions and replies, to the adjutant-general, accompanied by his own observations thereon, regarding the nature of the examination, the correctness of the answers, and the eligibility of the officer examined.

164. Every cornet or ensign is to be examined on the different points herein specified, before he has completed one year’s service; and should he fail to qualify himself for promotion within that period, his commanding officer must report, through the general officer commanding, for the information of the Commander-in-Chief, whether it is owing to a want of diligence and attention on the part of the officer, or to sickness, or other circumstances over which he could have had no control.

165. No officer will be recommended for promotion to the rank either of lieutenant or captain unless his examination papers and certificate of qualification have been received by the Military Secretary; but the Commander-in-Chief will, in all cases, select the senior officer who may have qualified for promotion to the higher grade.

_Artillery._

166. The examination of lieutenants of artillery for the rank of captain will include all the subjects required from officers of the line of corresponding rank, except that a general knowledge only of the evolutions of cavalry and infantry will suffice. In addition to the foregoing, lieutenants of artillery are to be examined as to their acquaintance with the more special duties of their arm of the service. The following will serve as a guide:

(_a._) Field-gun drill. Exercise of heavy guns on ground and traversing platforms, mortar drill, rocket drill, Armstrong gun drill, practice with hot shot and molten iron shells, gun and transporting carriage drill.

(_b._) General duties of the men, and principles involved in mounting and dismounting ordnance generally, in placing guns on towers, in embarking and disembarking ordnance, and in moving ordnance up steep inclines; also the tackle, etc., required in the above operations.

(_c._) Different pieces of ordnance in use throughout the service at
the time of examination, their weight and calibre, and special purpose.

(_d._) Ammunition employed with ordnance generally; ammunition employed with Armstrong guns; general construction of a Congreve rocket, and the principle of its motion; manufacture and action of fuzes and tubes; the advantages of the rifle action, and the principle upon which it depends; essential points with regard to rifling ordnance: general principles of breaching; position and employment of artillery in the field; considerations which regulate the rapidity of artillery fire; principles connected with the construction of artillery carriages; general knowledge of laboratory duties.

(_e._) Embarking and disembarking horses; management of horses on
board ship.

(_f._) To be able to define technical artillery terms, etc., in such a way as to make them understood by the non-commissioned officers and men under their command, such as,--1, point blank; 2, point blank range; 3, dispart; 4, chambers; 5, preponderance; 6, different kinds of artillery fire; 7, how elevation gives an increase of range; 8, windage; 9, deviation, etc., etc.

(_g._) Subalterns who have been one year or more in the horse brigade, or in a field battery, will be required, in addition to the foregoing subjects, to be thoroughly acquainted with stable duties, and horse artillery or field battery movements and details. All must have a general knowledge of these subjects.