Talk:Sale of commissions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sale of commissions article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792–1815)

[edit] Is the article quite right

Didn't the sale of commission remain up until WW1, albeit in a curtainled form. I thought it was the case you could by your way to Major (but no further) until then. Although the article is basically right on the real issue. There is obviously a difference between buying a Lieutencancy and Generalship.

Not as I understand it. Until WWI officers still entered the service via an "agent" who would arrange their training and commission - nothing like the modern-day system, but not an outright sale as it had been before Cardwell. Shimgray | talk | 18:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, here's the situation. As of 1895, you got an infantry/cavalry commission via:

a) Open competition at Sandhurst [50% of places]

b) Competition from among the militia [25%]

c) 'by qualification, through the colonies and through the ranks' [25%]

This last one was broken down into...

1. Queen's Cadets, and others entering 'the college' (?) by qualifying examination;
2. university candidates, who had a set number of commissions to compete for
3. candidates from colonial militaries and colonial universities
4. sergeant-majors promoted on examination

As you can see, competition [ie examinations] was the favoured method, as with every public office in the late-Victorian period. I'm not sure which of the various classes was the standard way for a young gentleman to get a commission; I suspect #1. The Sandhurst regime of the time was not overly taxing... Shimgray | talk | 21:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Price of Cardigan's Commission?

This site http://www.cwreenactors.com/~crimean/purchsys.htm#promos claims the price of Lord Cardigan's commission as 25,000 pounds, not 40,000. I have heard usually 40,000, but as high as half a million pounds (an obvious mistake, of course). Any corroborations in publish accounts you may have, gentlemen? TaylorSAllen 00:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Historical Objections

I actually came here to find out about objections to the practice historically. The article mentions that the Prussians didn't engage in the practice but did senior personnel comment on the practice? Was there controversy between the two styles? This seems to be written from a very British perspective.Nickjost 18:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)