War Office Reform.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 34, 10 February 1904, Page 4

War Office Reform.

"ECONOMY," AND ITS ATTAINMENT. It was announced recently tlnJt tine War Office were making frantic efforts to reduce expenditure in view of next year's Budget. It was stated nlso tihat, in the endeavour to secure "economy at all costs," the departmental chiefs nre showing no regard Tor the ulterior consequences of the proposed "reforms." Mow far the elllciency of the army is likely to be weakened by the newborn zoal for cutting down expenses,* whether necessary or not may be judged by the following examples (says the Daily Chronicle). It would seem an obvious truth that the first duty of the War O/lice is to »ee tkat the troops' are. thoroughly trained and prepared lor war ; indeed, Mr lirodrick's Army Corps scheme was regarded by its' few admirers as oflei-mg: a S|ii»ru'ntu> (that our Home Army would be brought to, and maintained at, a higher state of efficiency than ever before. The War Olfice might reasonably >.e expected to spend money freely in tfiis direction—for manoeuvres, field uxeicis.es, target piiacti.ee, and ;Ihci like* which are absolutely essential to the proix'r training of officers and men. Yet we have good authority for stating that this is one of the items of expenditure on which the War Office propose to retrench. The military estimate of the minimum cost of tna'piing all the troops in the United Kingdom in 1904-5 is. we believe, about £400,000 ; and this would seem to be a modest and reasonable allowance. But the War Office, desirous of "economy at all costs," proposed to allow £120,000 hi all—or less than a third of the sum raq|iiinod. A sum of £35,000 is allotted out of this for the training lof the Irish establishment, now j known as the Third. Army Corps—inI eluding'the Militia ; the military has v asked for £BO,OOO. A sum ef £ls, 1 000 is assistiud for the same purl ! pose to the Fourth Army Corps, which has its headquarters in Lonj don,' and includes Regulars, Militia, and Volunteers : the military had demanded £4-0,000 as a minimum. , Thus is "economy"' t Q Ire practised at' the expense of efficiency, if the influences now ruling the War Office are not chocked. For, obviously, the result of reducing this vote tc such modest iliimensions will be thai most of our troops will receive no ; proper tiiaii)»iTi|g iat all in tho next 1 financial year.