P4 
1826.) ag GED 2} 
oe “nes AND COMPANY’S TROOPS IN INDIA. 
8 yd. gad ‘To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
‘As periodicals do not move so rapidly to this quarter of the world 
as perhaps they ought to do, I hope you, Mr. Editor, will not be offended 
if I confess the fact, that I did not see your number for last March until 
the day before yesterday. If it make any amends, I faithfully promise 
that sucha ‘lapse of time shall not occur again. __. a hoaleae 
In that number there was an article headed “ The King’s Troops in, 
India,” page 267, &c.; in which much complaint was made of the man- 
net in which that body is treated. I do not wish by any means that the. 
King’s troops, or any troops, should be il-treated ; and I heartily desire. 
that any thing of which they -have reason to complain will meet with 
that attention and remedy which it may deserve. But I do think. 
that the writer of the article has not fairly contrasted the situation of 
the Company’s officer with that of the King’s; and that the balance he 
has struck in favour of the former is not exactly corresponding with the 
facts of the case. Iam prepared to state that the King’s service is far 
better : and can support my position, not on loose reasoning, but actual 
documents. 
«After two and twenty years,” says the writer, p. 272, “the Company’s 
captain retires on £180 per annum; after nearly the same, the King’s 
captain retires on £127.” Both these pittances, I admit, are shabby 
enough for a man who has had the habit of being considered, and of 
considering himself as a gentleman. That, however, is nothing to the 
purpose. I allow the fact. But there is something else to be considered. 
Will the writer have the goodness to consider what is the proportion 
to the service of the number of captains of twenty-two years’ standing 
in the King’s army, and the proportion of the Company’s captains? Now 
Ihave made the calculation, and I can convince any one who will take 
the trouble of following it, that on an average it has taken about seven- 
teen years to rise up to the rank of major in the line; while, in the 
Company’s service, it takes twenty-five years to attain the same step. 
In the line, also, when a man is made a major he rises zu his regiment (or 
he may rise), to be lieutenant-colonel. _ In the Indian army, after having 
been, as shewn already, five and twenty years getting to that rank, he 
is left to dine promotion, and finds himself at the bottom of a list of per- 
haps a hundred majors senior to him. This is a misfortune to which the 
King’s troops are not subjected. 
Of course ‘there are unfortunate cases in the King’s army, and subal- 
terns who have grown grey in the service can be quoted. But here, in 
the Indian army, the regular rule is as I have above stated. Suppose I 
give you an instance in which the two services happen to come in col- 
lision. Lieut.-Colonel Carpenter, a cadet of the year 1781, a date which 
is senior to that of any major-general in the service,—a captain of 1796, 
major of 1805 (in those days promotion went on faster than it can do 
at present), and lieut.-colonel of the 30th October 1811,—is hindered 
| holding the army rank of colonel, although holding the regimental 
ee bécause the King did not issue a brevet of colonel for 1811; and 
at : 
mission to the rank of colonel in the army would therefore super- 
sedé Lieut.-Colonel Michael McCreagh, of the 13th foot, a major of 
1809, but a lieutenant-colonel of the 3d of October 1811; a lieutenant 
four weeks prior to Colonel Carpenter's admission to that rank. Now in 
