§ On the question that 24,330l. be granted for the wages of workmen in foreign dockyards,
§ Sir E. Codringtonrose to call the attention of the House to the inadequate wages received by the workmen in the dockyards. They had been praised by the Admiralty, but their wages had been reduced from 2l. 17s. per week, in 1814, to 1l. 7s.. 6d. in 1821. Since then their ship money had been taken away, and a considerable number of them had been turned adrift without either pay or pension. In many cases, too, no allowance had been made to the shipwrights and others who had received hurts in the service. This conduct he considered very injurious to the public, for, in case of a war, the services of such men would be required, and then it would not be possible to obtain them.
§ Mr. Charles Woodadmitted, that the dock-yard wrights were a most exemplary body of men, but when they received nearly 3l. per week, they were obviously paid at too high a rate. Sir James Graham, when first Lord of the Admiralty, had ascertained that the average rate of wages in private yards was 4s. per day, and the wages paid in the King's dock- 1109 yards exceeded the average of the wages paid in private dock-yards. The men in them, too, had the chance of a pension, and they had medical assistance whenever they were laid up by accidents. He considered those statements a sufficient answer to the observations of the gallant Admiral though the Admiralty he was sure had every wish to treat the men in question with the greatest consideration, knowing that their services were indispensable.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 71,431l., for completing the sum necessary for the purchase of naval stores, be granted to his Majesty.
§ Mr. George F. Youngthought this vote ought to be accompanied by detailed statements of what the money was wanted for. He must complain too of the manner in which the timber store for the navy was obtained. Instead of being procured by public contract, it was made the subject of private arrangement with parties possessing influence with the Admiralty. If it were left to public competition, a great saving would result. The public market also would be less liable to fluctuations, and the public and individuals would both be benefited by open competition. He objected also to the vote because he believed there was no responsibility that the stores would be properly applied. He must complain too of the lavish expenditure of stores, occasioned by the experiments in naval architecture now being made by Captain Symonds. He had a great respect for that officer, but he thought that gentlemen brought up to the business of ship-building, were more likely to build ships well, than a naval officer with whom every vessel he constructed was an experiment. Such a proceeding was extravagant and disastrous. Captain Symonds claimed to have discovered a new principle of shipbuilding. For his part he did not believe in its efficacy, but all the old ships would be pulled to pieces to build new ships on Captain Symonds's plan. He could have no confidence in estimates prepared under such auspices, particularly as several of Captain Symonds's ships had been altered while building, and altered after they had been built. He repeated that he objected to the whole sum being proposed in a lump. He thought that when money to such an amount was called for, details should be given, and he was afraid that those who had the management of this department were inadequate to the task.
§ Mr. Charles Wooddefended the vote. All the information was given in the estimate which could be useful to the House, and he had explained, on introducing the estimates, that this sum was demanded on the responsibility of the Government. Timber was not purchased as the hon. Member said privately, it was sometimes bought by contract and sometimes by private bargain as circumstances dictated; and he was ready to maintain that no more than the fair market price had been paid for timber. With respect to Captain Symonds, he had only to say that persons who, without the smallest disrespect to the hon. Member were by profession far more competent to form an opinion on the subject, had expressed themselves in terms of high commendation upon the subject of his experiments in naval architecture. The hon. Member complained of the waste of stores by Captain Symonds's experiments; the fact was, that the quantity of timber required each year had been gradually diminishing from 21,000 loads in 1829, to 9,000 loads in 1834; yet there were more ships at sea in 1834 and more building than in 1829. He must deny too that Captain Symonds's ships were altered either during the building or after they were built. All Captain Symonds's ships had been finished according to the designs first laid down, and almost all other ships were altered in the progress of constructing them. He should be ready to meet the hon. Member when he made any direct charges; at present the hon. Member only made insinuations.
§ Admiral Adamconfirmed all that his hon. Friend, the Secretary of the Admiralty had said, with respect to Captain Symonds's character and his merit as a ship-builder.
Sir George Clerk, while he admitted Captain Symonds's merits, objected to the system of making a naval officer surveyor of the navy. The surveyor of the navy ought to be well instructed in, and conversant with, naval architecture.
§ Admiral Adampraised the construction of Captain Symonds's ships; and, adverting to the Barham and the Vernon, observed, that although the Barham did much better than he expected, the Vernon greatly exceeded her in stability.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that a sum not exceeding 99,256l. be granted to his Majesty to 1111 defray the expense of conveying convicts to New South Wales,
Mr. Goulburnsaid, he would take that opportunity of alluding to the two convict vessels, the George the Third and the Neva, which had recently been wrecked, and of the dreadful loss of life by which the wreck of each had been attended. Looking at the length of the voyage, and the number of human lives at stake, it was highly necessary that none but vessels of the most sea-worthy class should be employed on this service. He thought it would be highly satisfactory to the House and to the country, if the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. C. Wood) would take this opportunity of stating what had been the result of the inquiries made by the Government as to the loss of the two vessels he had named, and also whether there had been any change introduced either into the mode of surveying vessels previous to their being taken up for this service, or in the rate that, was paid for them when they were so taken up—whether in fact any such change had been adopted as could lead to the supposition that a better class of vessels would for the future be employed.
§ Mr. Charles Woodreplied, that the most minute inquiries had been made into the circumstances attending the wreck of the vessels to which his right hon. Friend had referred; and if a wish to that effect were expressed, he should be willing and happy to place the whole of the information which had been obtained on the subject before the House. With respect to the mode of taking up convict ships, he begged to state, that since the year 1833, such alterations had been made as necessarily secured the employment of a better, more comfortable, and more sea-worthy class of vessels than those formerly engaged in this service. Before any vessel was taken up in any port, it was surveyed, and must be favourably reported of by the resident agent of the Government, assisted by a naval officer and an intelligent shipwright. In the case of the George the Third, the parties who surveyed her and upon whose approval she was taken up, declared that when she left Deptford she was in every respect, a fit and proper vessel for the purpose for which she was to be employed, and that her subsequent loss could not in any way be ascribed to her want of seaworthiness. The result of the inquiries which had been made upon the subject 1112 went, indeed, directly to show that the loss of the George the Third was attributable, not to any defect or decay in herself, but to the attempt to carry her through a dangerous and not well known strait. As to the Neva, the most rigid investigation had been instituted into its character before it was permitted to sail; and it was declared sea-worthy not only by the Government surveyor but by the surveyor of Lloyd's, an impartial witness. Very considerable expense had been incurred to repair that ship.
Mr. Chapmansaid, the loss of the vessel in question had not so much to do with the character of the vessel as with the temerity of the commander in putting it through this difficult strait at night.
§ Mr. George F. Youngsaid, that though the George the Third and the Neva were old vessels, they happened to be good ones for the service they were engaged in; but it was the system of taking up and inspecting vessels that was so defective. For instance, the Anne was reported when taken up by the Government inspectors, as fit for the service; but the economical system they were restricted to, did not enable them to look deep enough, and it was only afterwards, when an accident obliged the Anne to undergo a slight repair for the fitting of a new fore-foot, that it was discovered that her principal timbers were in such an unsound state that if sent to sea in the state the inspectors had pronounced her fit for service she must have certainly foundered in the first gale. To attain the results they desired, Government must establish a more liberal rate of allowance for inspection, and then only superior vessels would be taken up, for which, of course, they must pay a higher rate of freight. Thus only could they obtain good vessels for such a service.
§ Mr. Thornelyhad been credibly informed that the Neva was twenty years old. If so, the Admiralty were certainly not justified in hiring such a vessel without a strict examination into her soundness. He, however, was of opinion, that no vessel ought to be employed for so important a purpose as the conveyance of hundreds of human beings if her age exceeded eight or ten years.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that taking the statement as true, that the Neva was twenty years old, the 'Admiralty had certainly failed to justify the manner in which she had been hired.
§ Mr. Wakleyalso thought the explanation offered by the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wood very unsatisfactory. Nor was there any intimation that the system would be abandoned.
§ Sir Thomas Troubridgewished that those hon. Gentlemen who seemed to know so much of nautical affairs would explain to the House how any vessel, be she of whatever class, could run among rocks at nine miles an hour with double-reefed topsails without going to pieces.
§ Mr. Wakleysaid, that he had once been a voyage to the East Indies, and therefore, knew something about the sea and about ships, and he would himself be glad to know what sort of a commander he would be who would have the temerity to run among rocks, with double-reefed topsails, at nine miles an hour.
§ Sir Thomas Troubridgesaid, that from the rock not having been properly laid down in the chart, the Captain had run upon the rock in ignorance.
§ Mr. Charles Woodread a testimonial of the commander's fitness, from which it appeared that he had had a previous experience of the navigation of the seas in which the vessel was wrecked, and that he had not been chosen to the command of the vessel without having had the highest character from naval officers.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that after this testimonial, there could be no further doubt as to the previous fitness of the commander; but it must still be remembered by the Admiralty that there was such a thing as examination. He still maintained, that no vessel ought to be hired for such a purpose as this, unless her soundness had been previously ascertained by competent surveyors.
§ Mr. George F. Younghoped, that this discussion would at least have one good effect, in showing to the Government that it would, in future, be better to have testimonials to the fitness of commanders and examination of the soundness of vessels before hiring them to perform this most important service, rather than to expose themselves to those suspicions, which, however unfounded they might be, were nevertheless excited when those unfortunate occurrences took place.
Sir G. Clerkhoped, that in future none but A. 1 vessels would be employed. As this was the last vote, he could not but compliment the hon. Secretary on the clearness with which the estimates had 1114 been laid before the House. At the same time, however, he could but regret that there had been in the present case a departure from the practice of the estimates being introduced by a Lord of the Admiralty.
§ Mr. Wakleycould not agree with the hon. Baronet in thinking that these estimates deserved credit for so much clearness; and he should next Session, divide the House upon every estimate unless they were much more clear and explanatory.
§ Vote agreed to.