The Inspector-General observes that the explanation of this increase “is to be found in the fact that soldiers who formerly were summarily convicted and sentenced to short periods of imprisonment in regimental cells by their commanding officers for drunkenness are now tried by court-martial and sentenced to imprisonment in a military prison.” But precisely the same explanation was given, in the report for the preceding year, of the increase of the committals in 1865 over those in 1864. Therefore, however applicable this consideration might have been to a comparison with former periods when drunkenness was not dealt with by court-martial, it totally fails to account for the further increase which has occurred since the change was made. It must not be supposed that the 1,926 cases in the year 1866 were cases of simple drunkenness, such as we see disposed of in the police-courts by a fine of five shillings. The offence was “habitual drunkenness,” of which there are several definitions in the military code; but much the largest portion of the committals are for having been drunk “for the fourth time within 365 days.” In order, therefore, to form a just idea of the prevalence of this vice in the army, we must add to the cases brought before a court-martial the far more numerous instances in which the offenders are discovered less than four times a year, and are punished by their commanding officers, or in which they are not discovered at all. Drunkenness is _the_ vice of the army. The state of feeling which pervaded society two generations ago still survives in the army. That species of “good fellowship,” which is only another name for mutual indulgence in intoxicating drink, is still in the ascendant in the most popular of English professions, and from this vantage-ground it exercises an injurious influence over the moral condition of the entire community. The following order, relative to the punishment of drunkenness in the army, as directed by the Horse Guards, has just been published: “First and second acts, admonition or confinement to barracks at the discretion of the commanding officer. For every subsequent act of drunkenness within three months of former act, 7_s._ 6_d._; if over three and within six months, 5_s._; if over six and within nine months, 2_s._ 6_d._; if over nine and within twelve months, company entry; if over twelve months, to be treated as the first act. When the four preceding acts have been committed in twelve months, 2_s._ 6_d._ to be added to the foregoing amounts, and the _maximum_ daily stoppage is to be 2_d._”