HC Deb 25 July 1853 vol 129 cc744-59

Order for Committee read.

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, this Bill had reached the present stage without one word having fallen from the First Lord of the Admiralty in the way of explanation of its provisions. It was read a second time between one and two o'clock in the morning, when no statement could well be made by the right hon. Gentleman. He was most anxious to give his assistance to any scheme for the better manning of the Navy; but he hoped that out of respect to the House some explanation of so important a measure would be given.

SIR GEORGE PECHELL

said, he believed the House was perfectly well ac- qnainted with the provisions of the Bill, which he looked upon as the charter of the British Navy. He was anxious that the Bill should pass, in order that seamen might be enabled to understand as soon as possible the beneficial character of its enactmeats.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, he could assure the hon. and gallant Member for Bath (Captain Scobell), that it was not from any want of respect to the House that he had asked them to go into Committee on this Bill without making any statement. He agreed with what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member for Brighton (Sir G. Pechell) that it was most desirable they should perfect this measure with the least possible delay. He thought they had arrived at that period of the Session when it was desirable to occupy the time of the House as little as possible with speeches, and that it would be better for them to proceed at once to the consideration of the measure in detail. As it was wished for, however, he could have no objection to lay before the House a short summary of the provisions of the Bill. When he last had the honour of being at the Board of Admiralty he thought it his duty to bring in a Bill with reference to the manning of the Navy. By that Bill, which was passed in 1835, the time of the duration of the service was limited to five years on board Tier Majesty's Fleet; but, practically; though it was limited to five years, seamen generally, by enlisting in particular ships that had already been some time in commission, did not serve more than three and a half years. The House would observe that the consequence was, that when a ship was paid off, the seamen had acquired the most perfect discipline—the men had been trained to a knowledge of gunnery—through the teaching of the officers they had obtained a thorough familiarity with their various duties, formed habits of seamanship, and had acquired such a degree of perfection that it was most desirable they should remain in the service. The House was in possession of the report of the committee of naval officers, and they had also the Order passed by Her Majesty in Council, upon the advice of the present Board of Admiralty. By that Order in Council, and in conformity with the report of the naval officers, peculiar inducements had been held out to seamen voluntarily to change the period of their enlistment from the limited period of five years to that of ten, and in consideration of their acceptance of that longer term, the Government had agreed to grant an increase of pay. To second class ordinary seamen, the increase would be ld. a day, to ordinary seamen 2d. a day, and to able seamen and petty officers, 3d. a day. In addition to these there were various inducements held out to seamen generally. A new rate was established between the able seamen and the petty officers, to which a higher amount of pay was awarded, and also certain exemptions from punishment. There was also a very considerable increase of pay to warrant officers, and generally it was hoped and believed, that the Bill would greatly add to the inducements to seafaring men to enter the Navy—that it would contribute greatly to their comfort when they were in the service, and, by operating favourably to their advantage, promote at the same time the general efficiency of the service. Under the Act of 1835 power was given to the Queen in Council, in the apprehension of any impending danger or great emergency, to issue a Proclamation calling upon all seafaring men to come in, promising double bounty if they would enlist within a time limited, and an addition of one-fourth increase of pay to all those who acted beyond the limited service of five years. Inconvenience had been felt by the Proclamations being general to all seafaring men; and he proposed to give the Queen in Council the power of limiting the Proclamation, not calling on seafaring men universally, but on a certain class of them to be therein designated by the present register of seamen. This would enable the Crown so to apportion the service of these seamen in regard to age, &c., as might be found most beneficial; and he might say he anticipated no difficulty in giving limited effect to the Proclamation, in lieu of the general effect now given by the Act of 1835. The Act of 1835, as he had just stated, promised double bounty; but the Bill now before the House left it to the advisers of the Crown to regulate the amount of bounty, so that there might be single or double bounty, or if any emergency of a very pressing character should arise, it might be carried even beyond double bounty. So, also, with reference to increase of pay. Under the Act of 1835 it was enacted specifically that the increase of pay should be one-fourth. Circumstances of considerable urgency, but not such as to justify such an increase of expense as one-fourth, might arise, and it was thought desirable that the specific increase of one-fourth should be somewhat reduced, and instead of it that there should be only the addition of 2d. a day. There were other minor provisions to which he did not think it necessary to advert. The measure had been drawn up solely with a view to the benefit of the service, and he hoped the House would now allow it to go into Committee, so that it might then be considered, clause by clause, and rendered as perfect as possible.

SIR GEORGE TYLER

said, he must express a hope that the Admiralty would publish a part, if not the whole, of the evidence on which the report of the naval officers was based, because he thought it would be beneficial to the country, and important to the profession, that the opinions of men of high standing and great practical experience should be made public. If a precedent were necessary, they had only to refer to the French Commission appointed to conduct an inquiry for a similar purpose, in which case the evidence was fully and amply reported for the information of the public.

MR. STAFFORD

said, so far as his memory served him, there was an arrangement made that this evidence should not be considered otherwise than confidential. He was sure that it was not from any wish to undervalue the evidence of these distinguished officers that the right hon. Baronet opposite had withheld it from the House; and, as Secretary to the late Board, he was quite willing to take his share of the responsibility incurred by the evidence being so withheld.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he had always taken a direct interest in promoting the welfare of the Navy, and although perhaps, with the exception of the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), no hon Member had opposed more votes of proposed more reductions in Committee of Supply, yet he could most conscientiously say he had never opposed a single vote which he thought was calculated to make the Navy efficient. He believed the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Admiralty was most desirous to place the Navy in that position which every man in this country must admit to be necessary and he looked upon the proposition to embody 10,000 additional seamen as in finitely of more advantage in protecting the coast from invasion than the enrolment of 80,000 militiamen, There would never be any difficulty in manning the Fleet, pro- vided the sailors had more inducements held out to them for entering the service; but at present, although they did not always get better paid, they preferred the merchant service to entering one of Her Majesty's ships, where they would be subject to the system of corporal punishment. He was glad, however, to see by the returns before the House, that a considerable diminution had taken place in the number of cases where this degrading mode of punishment had been resorted to in the Navy. Not that he attributed this diminution so much to the influence of the Admiralty authorities and officers of the Navy, as to the agitation which had taken place in the country, and more particularly in that House, upon the subject; for there were captains, commodores, and admirals who still thought the discipline of the Navy depended upon the fear of the lash, just as some years ago there were Judges and justices who thought the safety of the country depended upon the infliction of capital punishment for minor offences. With the progress of time, however, came a change of feeling, and although capital punishment had been abolished in more than a hundred cases, they did not find that crime increased; but, on the contrary, looking at the increase which had taken place in the population, he believed it had diminished. And why? Why, because the punishment for offences was now rendered more certain, and it had been just the same in the Army. From 1,000 lashes in the Army, the maximum was reduced to 500, while last year the late Duke of Wellington, much to his credit, limited the number to fifty; and what had been the consequence? Why, if the same system were adopted in the Navy, be was quite convinced the service would be furnished with far superior men than it was at present. There should be courts martial on board ships of war, the same as in the Army. The captain, lieutenants, master, master's mate, officers of marines, would form just as good courts for the trial of sailors as were found in the Army for the trial of soldiers. They would get rid of the prejudice naturally arising from the power of punishment being entrusted to the hands of one man, and give an impression that, at all events, it was not inflicted under the influence of passion, or from vindictive motives. It was true that a captain in the Navy could only inflict forty-eight lashes, and a certain time must elapse between the order and the punish- ment; but those forty-eight lashes were worse than 200 in the Army, because the instrument was totally different, being made of thick twine instead of small twine, and the blows were laid on less rapidly, and with a degree of deliberation which made the punishment infinitely more severe. In time of war, when the outcasts of prisons were sent on board ship, severity might he necessary to maintain discipline; but if men were wanted for the Fleet, of the best class, this mode of punishment might as well be abolished, for it would be perfectly unnecessary to make them do their duty. So long as the merchant service was open to good sailors, they could not induce them to enter Her Majesty's ships, in the face of this degrading punishment of the lash—tearing the flesh from men's backs—and he hoped that the right hon. Baronet would give the matter his best consideration.

MR. MACKINNON

said, he wished to draw the attention of the House to the system of manning the navy as pursued in France. They all knew that the French army was created by conscription, but with regard to the navy the means were different. Every person who had been afloat, either on a river or on the sea—even the man who managed a ferry boat—in short every person who gained his livelihood by living on the water, whether fresh or salt, was what was called "inscribed" by the authorities of his dictrict. Whenever a call was made by the Admiralty of France, or by the person at the head of that department, as many men as could be found to volunteer were procured from this inscribed list. If a sufficient number of these volunteers could not be obtained from men accustomed to the sea, then they extended the "inscription" to those who were on fresh water; and if a sufficient number were still not found, then they were balloted for in the same way as we did for the militia. He thought that a good deal of the cumbrous machinery of the present Bill might be done away with if the simple plan of the French Government were adopted. It would give greater power to the Admiralty to raise men, and in a much quicker manner.

VISCOUNT MONCK

said, he was not one of those who desired to abolish corporal punishment in the Navy altogether, as he thought that in some cases it was necessary to maintain discipline, but it ought to be limited in a greater degree than it was at present.

MR. HENLEY

said, he must confess that he did not think that the punishment was the cause of the men not entering the naval service. The marines when afloat were, he believed, subject to the same kind of corporal punishment, yet there was no difficulty in getting men for that service, neither was there any difficulty in enlisting men for the Army. He regretted that the committee of naval officers had not gone into the inquiry, and probed the subject to the core, as to the causes why seafaring men did not prefer the Queen's service. It was very remarkable, but for some reason or other it was the only part of the Queen's service the people were not anxious to go into.

ADMIRAL BERKELEY

said, he could assure the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. Williams), that the officers of the Navy were so cautiously watched that no improper punishments could take place; and, having had the command of two or three ships during peace, he positively asserted, from his own knowledge, that the fear of punishment was not the cause which prevented men from entering Her Majesty's service. He could assure the hon. Member that, with respect to one man who had made a great noise in a newspaper, that very man, on coming out of Exeter gaol, re-entered the service immediately; and with respect to another man, who the hon. Member wanted to induce the house to believe had been murdered by the officer of his vessel, so far from that being the case, he, also, had re-entered the service. The hon. Gentleman opposite was mistaken as to the reason why men of the best class could not be obtained immediately when wanted. The cause really was the conduct of that House in reducing at times the numbers of the Navy, and sending the best trained men adrift, and, therefore, the House ought not to be surprised that the men when wanted were not to be found. The right hon. Gentleman opposite was totally mistaken as to the popularity of the marine service as compared with the naval service. When the force was increased by 5,000 seamen and 1,500 marines, the 5,000 seamen, notwithstanding that high wages were given in the merchant service, and that seamen were in great demand in consequence of the requirements for California and Australia, had since December been raised, with the exception of about 800 men; whereas the Government had not yet got half the complement of marines voted at the same time. One thing the House should recollect, that if there was a constant preaching in that House to the effect that the men in the Navy were ill-used men, and that the officers were tyrants, and if the newspapers were continually telling the same story, the house ought to regard that as the cause which prevented the men from entering the service, and ought not to attribute the blame to the Board of Admiralty.

House in Committee.

Clause 1 (The provisions of the 5th and 6th William IV., as amended by the Bill, shall extend to men entering the naval service for ten years, or any other term of continuous and general service).

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, that in his opinion the repeal of the manning clause in respect to the merchant service would undermine the popularity both of the mercantile and naval services. With regard to obtaining men, they would do much more by encouragements than by punishments, and there were great want of encouragements in the Navy. One great evil was, that the governing power—the Board of Admiralty—was political, and change as often as power passed from the possession of one party to that of another. There had been three First Lord of the Admiralty within the last twelve months, and changes so rapid necessarily had an unfavourable influence on the Navy. He had no doubt that the present First Lord of the Admiralty meant well by the Bills now about to be discussed; but who knew that he would be able to carry them out, or that the next First Lord might not altogether differ from him on the matter? With regard to punishments, there were some forty or fifty ships in which there were no corporal punishments at all and therefore it seemed to him that as regarded this point something depended upon the temperament of the man who commanded. The officer had too much power in respect to the infliction of corporal punishment, which should not take place except upon the sentence of some court of inquiry, consisting, perhaps, of three officers, that would also relieve the captain of a portion of his responsibility. He also thought that reports of the minor punishments as well as of the corporal punishments should be sent to the Admiralty; for the necessity of making these reports had a tendency to diminish the punishments. As to the punishment of death it stood out in the Articles of War in a most terrific manner; and so far they certainly needed revision. The prize-money scale also wanted revision; and it was recommended in the report of the committee of naval officers that the flag officers should not have so large a portion of the prize money, and that the reduction of their share should go to the benefit of the seamen and petty officers. The main reason, however, why the Government did not get the sailors they wanted, was the absence of bounty money. While the militiamen and the soldiers got a bounty of 6l. on enlistment, did they expect seamen to enter the Queen's service for nothing? It was said that since December, in a period of seven or eight months, the Admiralty had got 5,000 men; but during the same period they must have paid off some thousands, and therefore, a deduction was to be made on that account. But, after all, what great amount was 5,000 men? They might get out of a Russian war just now, but in any case of hostilities they would want 30,000 or 40,000 additional men, and the question was how they were to be obtained?

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, he regretted that the hon. and gallant Gentleman had not confined his observations to the Bill before the House, as some of his remarks applied to the merchant service, and not directly to the Queen's service. In some respects the gallant Officer was not quite accurate in his statements. It was true that the militiamen received a bounty of 6l.; and, if the gallant Officer referred to the next Bill put down on the business paper, the Naval Coast Volunteers Bill, he would there find that with respect to the seafaring population a similar bounty of 6l. was held out. But with regard to the Army the gallant Officer was inaccurate, in saying that there was a bounty of 6l. The bounty for the soldier was not at all equal to that amount; for a large proportion of it was deducted from him in the shape of stoppages for furnishing his kit, which would pretty nearly equalise the lot of soldiers and sailors in that respect. The question of corporal punishment was the most painful subject that could be discussed; but it was not possible for him to pass the matter over after the observations which had been made. He thought his hon. and gallant Friend did not do justice to his brother officers if he believed them devoid of humanity and common feeling. He called on the House to recollect what was the position of an officer commanding a ship. Placing men in a vessel was little else than shutting them up in a box. Nature was almost violated by the circumstances in which the men, persons of strong passions and exposed to every temptation to sudden resentment and anger, were placed; and it was, therefore, absolutely necessary, for the safety of the ship, and the happiness of the crew, that power should be concentrated in one hand, and that must be the hand of the commanding officer. The position of an officer commanding a ship differed materially from that of an officer commanding a regiment in the Army. The soldier was not confined like the sailor, and it was possible to assemble a court martial to try him, in case of his offending; but, with every earnest desire which he felt in common with all his countrymen that there should not be one unnecessary pang inflicted on a fellow-creature, he was strongly convinced, that, while the circumstances of the Navy were such as they were, the power of inflicting corporal punishment in the hands of the commanding officer must be maintained. But were there no checks on the exercise of that power? There was, indeed, every check, which the most experienced officers of the Admiralty could devise. Quarterly returns of all punishments were required; the circumstances of each case must be stated, and every case was reviewed by the Admiralty; if any doubtful circumstances appeared, the officer was called on to explain, and, should his explanation not seem satisfactory to the Admiralty, the misconduct was noted against his character, and was not overlooked when his future employment became a question. With regard to minor punishments, the gallant Officer did not seem to be aware that all minor punishments were already regularly reported. He could assure the Committee that every Board of Admiralty in succession had been most anxious to reduce the amount of corporal punishments to the lowest degree consistent with the maintenance of discipline; and the whole subject, whether relating to corporal or minor punishments, was matter of constant solicitude to the Board of Admiralty, and was at the present moment under their review. The great unwillingness on the part of seamen to enter the Queen's service, existed only in the imagination of the gallant Officer. When the additional force was voted last December, he had not thought, considering the rate of wages in the merchant service, it would have been possible, without bounty, to raise the number of men. Nevertheless, the Admiralty had raised, without bounty, but by volunteering, 5,000 since last December; and since the increased rate of pay about to be confirmed by the present Bill, had been made known, no less a number than 800 seamen had entered the Navy. During the same time the Admiralty had only paid off 900 men. Considering the competition that existed, and the rate of wages given in the Colonies and foreign countries, he did not think that there could be much oppressive tyranny or unnecessary hardship in the service, when, under such circumstances, and in a very few months, so large an augmentation of the force could be obtained. He was confident that the principle on which the Bill proceeded, of prevailing upon men to enlist by a system of encouragement, was a sound principle, and he believed it would be successful in inducing men to enter the service, and in laying the foundation of that to which he attached great importance—a permanent reserve of seamen, available in times of exigency. The present Bill proceeded on the assumption that there should not be frequent changes in the amount of force; and he quite concurred in the observation which had been made, that one great cause of difficulty in respect to enlistment was to be found in the fact that that House had varied its policy from time to time with respect to the number of seamen to be maintained. At one time the Government wanted 5,000 additional men; but how was it to be expected that they could be obtained by volunteering in two or three months, when, some time previously, the House had compelled the Government to turn them off, with their period entitling them to pension unaccomplished? It was not surprising, then, after that House had adopted so unfair a course, that the men were not to be obtained just when it suited the purpose of the State to get them. The present Bill proceeded on the principle that there should be steadily employed a larger number of seamen for ten years, and that pensions should be granted in proportion to the time for which the men continued to serve. The pensions would go in aid of their wages in the merchant service, in case they chose to leave the Navy; while, if a period of emergency occurred, there would be, in consideration of the pensions given, a power in the Crown to call on the pensioners again to embark on board the Queen's ships; and these men, being able seamen and experienced gunners, and competent to sustain the honour of the British flag in any part of the world, would consti- tute the cheapest and most efficient possible reserve. The men, of course, would not be obliged to leave the Navy at the end of ten years; on the contrary, if they prolonged their term of service for fifteen years, they would receive a higher pension; and this pension, it was to be understood in either case, they would, on being called out after their retirement, receive in addition to their pay. The hon. Member for Lymington (Mr. Mackinnon) wished the Government to adopt the French system. That was the most perfect system of conscription it was possible to conceive; and he (Sir J. Graham) would not ask that House, unless in the last emergency, to go to the extremity of using force for the purpose of manning the Navy. He would first of all endeavour to exhaust every possible mode of inducement, by holding out encouragements. The system that prevailed on the other side of the Channel was inconsistent with British feelings and British freedom; and, if the House of Commons desired to maintain the supremacy of the British flag, it must not be niggardly in respect to pay and rewards to volunteers. The present measure would be attended with some expense; but the expense could not be deemed inordinate, when compared with the great object to be attained. The measure had received the deliberate sanction of officers of the highest character in the service; was sustained by the evidence given before the Naval Committee; and he and his Colleagues deliberately thought that they had laid on the table of the House information sufficient to sustain the recommendation; made to Parliament. They had presented to the House the Report of the Naval Committee, which was in the main sustained by the evidence; but, as the evidence was more or less of a confidential character they thought it would be injurious to the public service to publish it.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT

said, he thought that the period of service for ten years from the age of eighteen was too short. He saw no sound reason for making this limit at a time when Parliament was offering additional inducements to seamen to join the Navy. It was true the men were eligible to re-enter at the end of ten years when they could have the pensions of 6d. per day; but would it not be better to make the enlistment for twenty years certain holding out certain rewards for their so doing? He approved of the general principle of the Bill; but he thought it would be greatly improved by the annual admission of 1,000 boys of about fourteen years of age, to be trained as able seamen of the first class.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, he would remind the gallant Officer that this Bill proposed to double the existing period of service, and that the recent reduction of the time in the Army rendered it improbable that Parliament would sanction a further extension in the Navy. The number of 2,000 boys had been gradually increased, and the service had been found to be so desirable, that the boys, instead of wishing to leave the service, were inclined to stick to it.

SIR DE LACY EVANS

wished to know if, in case of emergency, Government had a power to give a bounty for enlistment? He was glad to hear of the number that had enlisted, but a period of seven months were required to get this number. He was told by naval men that a still greater number of seamen was required.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

replied, that by a provision of the existing law, bounty was given, on certain conditions, to men entering the service after the issue of a Royal proclamation, and that provision was enlarged by a clause in the present Bill.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, that the hon. and gallant Admiral (Admiral Berkeley) had adverted to a case he (Mr. Williams) formerly brought under the notice of the House. A seaman jumped from on board one of the Queen's ships, off the coast of California, and the captain, instead of sending a boat to recapture him, ordered his men to fire upon him. Afterwards a dead body was picked up, which was supposed at the time to be that of the man who had been fired at. It now appeared from the gallant Admiral's statement, that that man had re-entered the service; but he wished to know whether that could be the case, and whether the man must not be tried and punished as a deserter?

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, he thought that the hon. Member ought to be more guarded in his statements in future. The man who was reported to have been shot after jumping overboard at San Francisco, had now re-entered on board a Queen's ship, and had not been called to account. There was, however, no question as to his identity.

SIR JOSHUA WALMSLEY

hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not overlook the suggestion thrown out by the hon. Member for Lambeth, as to the establishment of courts-martial on board ship, similar to those which already existed in the Army. He felt grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he had done while connected with the Board of Admiralty, and trusted that he would add to the obligations he had already conferred on the naval service by adopting this excellent proposition of his hon. Friend the Member for Lambeth.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, he was flattered by the confidence which the hon. Gentleman reposed in him. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that this question had been considered by him most anxiously and in all its bearings. He had consulted all the officers on whose authority he thought he could most rely, and had endeavoured to exercise a calm judgment regarding it, and he was bound to say that he could not conscientiously recommend any departure from the present system. The power and the responsibility were so much in the hand of one man on board ship—the power no less than of causing happiness or unhappiness to every person on board—that he was bound to admit the great interest attaching to the question; but the more he had thought on the subject, and the more inquiry he had made, the more was he satisfied of the great importance, both as regarded the interests of discipline and the happiness of the ship's company, of having the power concentrated in the hands of one man, and that man the captain. He was afraid that any such co-ordinate power as it was proposed by his hon. Friend to confer upon the other officers along with the captain, would interfere very materially with discipline, and cause jealousies, heartburnings, and divisions, that would operate most injuriously upon the men. Considering the passions that were frequently excited on board ship, and the difficulties often experienced in managing a large body of men—in circumstances so peculiar, he was afraid that under the system of the hon. Member it would be found impossible to maintain discipline in Her Majesty's Navy.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 2 (Proviso as to the entering and service of boys).

MR. HENLEY

said, he would be glad to hear what regulations would be made to enable boys after a certain age to age released if they did not like the service?

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, the rules of the Admiralty were to the effect that boys were not to enter unless with the consent of their parents or relatives. From the great number of candidates, and the large power of selection, there need be no apprehension of the possible hardships anticipated by the right hon. Gentleman.

SIR GEORGE PECHELL

said, the popularity of the service was so great, and the supply of candidates so large, that it became very difficult to make a selection. The boys were rather over than under educated under the new regulations. He was satisfied that the proposed system would lay the foundation of an excellent reserve of able seamen. The right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Henley) had asked why men could not be found to enter? There were various reasons which led to this result, one of the principal of which was, that there were so many desertions to the gold regions. Not a less number than 14,000 seamen had deserted their vessels in Australia. These men were of course reluctant to return, because of the probable consequences of their misconduct. He firmly believed that the steps to be taken would do away with any difficulty in manning the Navy at any time.

CAPTAIN SCOBELL

said, out of the number of 21,000 boys educated by Government, only 3,000 afterwards entered the Navy. It could hardly be expected that a naval reserve, unless the proposed alterations were carried fully into effect, would enable Government to have that reserve which they contemplated.

SIR GEORGE TYLER

said, that one of the recommendations of the Report of the Naval Committee was not adopted, namely, that which suggested that able seamen who had served five years, should receive an addition of pay of one penny per day provided they enlisted for five years more.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, that this increase of pay would have involved an increased expenditure, which would be unnecessary and improvident.

SIR THOMAS ACLAND

wished to take this opportunity of calling attention to a subject closely connected with the present, though it certainly did not come within the operation of the Bill. He alluded to the employment of native African boys in the squadron on the west coast of Africa. These boys became exceedingly valuable as sailors, and he thought it was of great importance to encourage the practice, especially when they considered the very great increase that had taken place in the consumption of palm oil, and which would render our trade with Africa much greater than it had hitherto been. He had been informed that some difficulties had been thrown in the way of the reception of those native African boys, and he hoped the attention of the right hon. Gentleman would be directed to the subject, as nothing was likely to operate more beneficially in that part of the world than the practice to which he had alluded.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM

said, he would be always most happy to attend to any suggestion of his hon. Friend; but the subject he had introduced did not bear on the manning of the British Navy. It referred only to the employment of a certain number of Africans on the African station, and he had only to say he was not aware that there had been any diminution in the number of boys so employed.

Clause agreed to; as were also the remaining clauses.

House resumed. Committee reported.

Back to