Page:Army sanitary administration.djvu/13

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
And its Reform under the late Lord Herbert.
9

Among other reforms initiated during Lord Herbert's life, but incomplete at his death, were the following:—

Committee on Barrack Works, 1861.

He had seen that the sanitary defects in barracks and hospitals had on arisen from the unsatisfactory manner in which these buildings had been planned and constructed. No one engaged on them had had any knowledge of the requirements for health. If they had been made to put guns and stores in, and not men at all, or horses, they could not, in fact, have been worse. There was no recognition of the necessity even of space, or of fresh air, or of drainage, either for sick or well. To prevent this in future, Lord Herbert called together a committee, to inquire into the present system of executing barrack works, and to suggest administrative improvements.

The department, charged with spending money on buildings to keep men healthy, knew little about the principles of healthy construction, such knowledge not having been required of them.

The result of the labours of the committee, it is expected, will be a better and more economical organization, a proper training in the principles of sanitary works, and a total change in the sanitary construction of our future military buildings.

Commission for Soldiers' Day-Rooms and Institutes, 1861.

Another very important commission was also called, to consider the question how best to provide soldiers' day-rooms and institutes, in order to struggle with the great moral evil supposed to be inseparable from garrisons and camps.

Lord Herbert saw that, at present, the soldier was hardly thought of as a man at all. The effect of moral agencies upon him was practically ignored. He (Lord Herbert) had taught every one, by this time, the results of treating the soldier physically as if he were not a human being, subject to the laws of physical health. And, in the moral tone of garrisons and camps, he recognised the legitimate results of treating the soldier morally, as if he were not under the laws of moral health. Placed, as he is, under strict restraint, lodged in a crowded, uncomfortable, barrack-room—without privacy, without social intercourse, except that afforded by the canteen or by some much worse place; without home ties; without occupation or amusement, except such as is provided for him by those (and they are everywhere) who pander to his passions—the soldier has a position most unfavourable to his moral nature. And just as the soldier was formerly accused of dying unnecessarily, or because it could not be helped, the real causes being all the while ignored; so now, the consequences of overlooking moral causes go by the name of "camp vices." Not that nothing has been done in the way of direct teaching to counteract the evil; but, all the while, the immoral agencies or temptations by which the man is surrounded, have been left untouched; while no counteracting agencies of a moral kind have been provided to cope with these.

In civil life at home, it is supposed inconsistent with individual liberty to put down bad places of resort, and to prevent open temptations to profligacy; while, in certain continental states, it is not supposed against liberty or morals to make prostitution as little dis-