HC Deb 04 March 1861 vol 161 cc1384-92
SIR JOHN PARTINGTON

Sir, I understand it to be the intention of the Government to consent to the adjournment of the debate on Italian affairs. Therefore, although I am very sorry at this late hour to intrude on the House, I feel compelled to ask the Government, and especially the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty, to whom I have given notice of my intention, for an explanation on a matter which closely concerns the mode of transacting public business as between this House and the Ministers, and which, from the nature of the circumstances, I regard as very urgent. I have reason to believe that it is not now too late for the Government, if they should see fit, to change the intention announced early in the evening. I allude to the answer I received to a Question which I put at the usual hour—namely, whether or not I was to infer, from the fact that the Narcissus frigate had left Spithead, that the Admiralty have permitted Sir Baldwin Walker to leave England without giving evidence before the approaching Committee. I must remind hon. Gentlemen of what has taken place on this subject. I had occasion this day fortnight to explain to the House the reasons which induced me to give up my notice of Motion for a Committee to inquire into the administration of the Admiralty. In doing so I stated publicly that I had a few days before spoken to the noble Lord on the subject, and I expressed my hope that Sir Baldwin Walker would not leave England without giving evidence before the Committee. I confess I thought that public statement in the House of Commons would have been enough to insure that Sir Baldwin Walker would be examined as a witness, and I venture to say it ought to have been enough. Nothing move occurred till Thursday last. On that morning I was told by a friend that I had better make some inquiry, for he understood that Sir Baldwin Walker was to leave England on the following Saturday. I could hardly credit that information: but I immediately wrote a letter to my noble Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty to tell him that in the evening I meant to put a question to him to learn whether that report was true. When the debate came on that same evening on the Motion of the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir James Elphinstone), that hon. Member anticipated the question I was about to ask, and made an urgent appeal to my noble Friend on the importance of Sir Baldwan Walker's evidence, if the Committee really was to be granted. I followed the hon. Member for Portsmouth later in the debate, and, pursuing my written notice given in the morning, also addressed an earnest appeal to the noble Lord, stating that Sir Baldwin Walker was, if not the most important witness, certainly the most important with only one exception; and that it was absolutely essential, if you were to have an inquiry into the conduct of the Admiralty, that he should give his testimony. My noble Friend spoke immediately after me, beginning with a statement which I confess very greatly surprised mo. He said the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty hail been willing that Sir Baldwin Walker should, if necessary, be detained in this country, but that the noble Lord had applied to the hon. and gallant Admiral who was about to move for the Committee (Admiral Buncombe) whether he thought it necessary that Sir Baldwin Walker should be so detained. But that was not all. The noble Lord said he had applied, not to the hon. and gallant Admiral only, but to "the other members of the Committee." Now, the Committee was not then, and is not now, appointed. What private arrangement may have been going on with regard to it I cannot say; but, perhaps, the noble Lord can tell us what he meant last Thursday evening by stating that he had applied to the hon. and gallant Admiral and "the other Members of the Committee" to ascertain whether they wished that Sir Baldwin Walker should be detained. The noble Lord said that the hon. and gallant Admiral then expressed an opinion that the evidence of Sir Baldwin Walker before the Dockyard Commission would be sufficient for the forthcoming inquiry. Now I cannot, in passing, refrain from avowing my astonishment that the noble Lord or the hon. and gallant Admiral should have allowed themselves to be parties to so improper and irregular a proceeding. We are informed that the hon. and gallant Admiral who moved for the Committee is not even to be its Chairman; but supposing he were to be, I ask what right or what power he could possibly have to speak in the name of a Committee not yet appointed, and to undertake to say what its opinions would be with regard to the propriety of examining any particular witness? Sir, let me here protest against the futile, and—I do not wish to use any strong expression—but the untenable proposition that evidence taken before another Commission, which evidence is not before us, can be sufficient for all the purposes of another and a wholly distinct investigation. Even supposing that evidence to be in our possession, and to be formally referred by this House to this Select Committee, how can the noble Lord or the gallant Admiral say what cross-examination it may suggest to the Committee as indispensable to the due prosecution of their inquiry? So much for the first part of the noble Lord's answer. But he proceeded to say what I will now read to the House. The noble Lord's words were— Even now, if it were the wish of the House of Commons that Sir Baldwin Walker should remain a few days to give evidence before the Committee, the noble Duke would not put himself in opposition to its wishes. Now, I maintain that that was a pledge on the part both of the noble Lord and of the Admiralty that this important witness should not be sent away. What did the noble Lord mean by saying, "if it were the wish of the House of Commons?" How was he to ascertain the wish of this House? Did he suppose that we were going to move a formal Resolution? What test of the feelings of this House could he desire more conclusive than the fact of one Member after another rising and expressing a strong opinion that the testimony of Sir Baldwin Walker was all-important? It is mentioned in the quarter from which I took that extract that this intimation was received with cheers. Let me ask the noble Lord how many of the Gentlemen who joined in that cheer does he suppose thought that after this pledge given on Thursday night Sir Baldwin Walker would be sent away from England on Saturday morning? These are the facts of the case, with one material addition. The pledge given on Thursday night was contingent on the wish of the House of Commons. On Friday night we had another discussion on this subject; and then my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), took part in the debate, adding another opinion —and an opinion, I need not say, of no little weight under all the circumstances —to the earnest hope before expressed, that Sir Baldwin Walker would not be allowed to leave England before being examined. Well there was then still ample time left. We know the quickness of telegraphic despatches. And after this increased indication of what was the wish of the House of Commons, unaccompanied by the slightest symptom of an opposite desire, I say the noble Lord had as clear a proof as he could reasonably expect of the feeling of this House, and that the departure of Sir Baldwin Walker is a violation of the pledge given in the words I have quoted. I think it right to lose no time in bringing this matter forward. Here is a Committee of no ordinary interest moved for. There are some two or three men in whose power it is to throw light on the inquiry. One of the most prominent of them is Sir Baldwin Walker. And I am sorry to add that when in the face of all these circumstances we find Sir Baldwin Walker despatched from England on Saturday morning without necessity—for I do not think the noble Lord will pretend to say that the loss of another few days can be of any consequence beyond the mere delay in relieving Sir Henry Keppel at the Cape—it is impossible to resist the suspicion that there must be some motive beyond what is avowed for preventing the examination of this witness. It will be for the House to consider whether it will, under the circumstances, be of any use for this Committee to go on. I do not wish to commit myself to any hasty opinion, but my present impression is that the Committee will be of little or no value without the presence of this officer. This, however, will be a matter for subsequent consideration. For the present I only call on the noble Lord to give an explanation of the circumstances to which I have adverted; and I shall be glad if he can remove the impression that must exist, and the belief I have been obliged to express, that the conduct of the Admiralty, as it now stands before us, has been disrespectful to the House of Commons.

SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONE

wished to ask the noble Lord, whether he could tell where Sir Baldwin Walker was? After he had weighed from Spithead on Saturday a strong westerly wind came on to blow; it had kept on blowing very hard ever since, and that day three parts of a gale was blowing from the west-northwest. It was not, therefore, likely that the gallant Admiral had got very far, and it might still be within the bounds of possibility to detain him. He ventured to say that if Sir Baldwin Walker were not forthcoming the inquiry would be a mere mockery of Parliament, and the appointment of the Committee would be perfectly useless. It certainly did appear a most suspicious circumstance that Sir Baldwin Walker should be sent to sea in a gale of wind; as if it were desired by the Government to get him out of the way.

MR. CONINGHAM

regarded the occurrence complained of as an illustration of the objections to the system under which the head of an important department like the Admiralty was sitting in the other House of the Legislature. A charge of something like sharp practice had been brought against the noble Duke; but they saw nothing of him, and had no opportunity of forming an opinion with respect to him. He knew nothing of the noble Duke except from the little experience he had had of him when he attended the Select Committee on the National Gallery. The noble Duke's conduct on that occasion was certainly not such as was calculated to gain his (Mr. Coningham's) confidence, inasmuch as the Report which the noble Duke then drew up was, in his opinion, against the evidence.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

I am sure it will not be necessary for me to defend my noble Friend the Duke of Somerset's conduct as Chairman of the Committee on the National Gallery; but this I can say, that the way in which he has performed his duties at the Admiralty has given satisfaction. With regard to the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, as to where Sir Baldwin Walker is to be found now, I have no doubt he is boxing about the Channel. I do not think he can have got very far, and I can only repeat that if it be generally desired that the gallant Admiral should attend and give his evidence before the Committee, the Admiralty will not oppose itself for a moment to the wishes of the House. Let me state frankly what occurred. My right hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich was apparently in great doubt with reference to this Committee. Sometimes he said a Committee would be of no service, and then he came down and advocated its appointment. His opinions have changed as to the propriety or non-propriety—

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

I wish my noble Friend, if he quotes me, would do me the favour to quote me correctly. Just now he has put forward quite inaccurately what I stated.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

At all events, the right hon. Gentleman expressed an earnest desire the other night that Sir Baldwin Walker should be made to attend and give his evidence. I then stated that he had very important duties to perform; and I may now add that he has to meet Sir Henry Keppel at Ascension, to make arrangements for taking charge of his station, as Sir Henry Keppel has then to proceed to America to relieve another Admiral. It was thought right by the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty to detain Sir Baldwin Walker until he had prepared the Estimates; that delay, though necessary for the public service, was inconvenient, and it therefore became of great importance that Sir Baldwin Walker should start for his destination as soon as possible. I communicated to the Duke of Somerset the earnest wish of the right hon. Gentleman that Sir Baldwin Walker should remain; but I stated also that the gallant Admiral who was about to move for the Committee had come to me and mentioned that he had consulted several Gentlemen whom he proposed to name as members of the Committee—Gentlemen, give mo leave to say, whose ability and fitness the House will recognize if the Committee should come to be named—and that they were of opinion with him that there was no necessity to detain Sir Baldwin Walker from his important duties, as he had already given his evidence fully regarding the branch of the Admiralty with which he was connected. My gallant Friend stated the same thing distinctly to the House in the course of the evening. I, therefore, applied to the noble Viscount at the head of the Government to decide whether, under these circumstances, Sir Baldwin Walker ought to go or remain, adding that I was sure my noble Friend the Duke of Somerset would be ready to consult the wishes of the House. The noble Lord replied that he did not think there had been any conclusive expression of opinion on the part of the House that the gallant Admiral ought to remain. That was the state of the case on Thursday. It is quite true that on Friday evening the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxfordshire expressed a desire that Sir Baldwin Walker should remain. It being my duty to make known any observations which may be made in this House to the noble Duke and to the Board of Admiralty, my noble Friend asked in answer whether I thought there had been any general expression of opinion on the part of the House. I could not say that there had been anything beyond the fact that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Droit-wich, who seemed to have taken on himself a very leading part in this mat- ter and one or two other Gentlemen, had made the request; and, on the other hand, that the gallant Admiral, for himself and his friends, had expressed a wish that Sir Baldwin Walker should proceed on the service indicated. The question, therefore remains—Did the House express any opinion on the subject? I can say honestly that I do not think any decided opinion was expressed. But if such be now the wish of the House I beg to say that I will this night acquaint the noble Duke with that wish, and will take measures to stop Sir Baldwin Walker, at whatever inconvenience to the public service.

MR. HENLEY

It must be apparent to every one that evidence said to have been given before a Commission having reference especially to dockyards cannot properly be relevant to such a very different question as the constitution of the Board of Admiralty; and, therefore, the evidence of Sir Baldwin Walker, having been so restrained, cannot be applicable to the present purpose. Now, the Admiralty does not stand particularly well in public estimation at the present moment; many persons have not been able to reconcile to themselves the assent given to the appointment of this Committee; and I put it to the noble Lord whether the public would not be apt to say that the Admiralty granted this Committee at the same time that they took care the only man who could really give satisfactory evidence should be removed. If my recollection does not fail me, Sir Baldwin Walker was appointed to his late position during the Administration of the late Sir Robert Peel. See, therefore, what immense experience he must have possessed. All the changes of importance in naval construction must have taken place during his reign at the Admiralty. Therefore, it is quite impossible that, without the presence of the gallant Admiral the matter can be fairly inquired into. He is the only person who can carry the stream of information through such a number of years, and through all those interesting changes as to which the public mind is so much excited as almost to have come to the conclusion that some error, or shortcoming, or mistake, has existed somewhere. If the inquiry is to be useful, let us have the means of pursuing it effectually; but if not it would be better to come to a Resolution condemnatory of the Admiralty at once, and call on the Government to provide a substitute. It is right, however, to inquire before we condemn, and we ought not to be deprived of the only witness who is capable of carrying us through the inquiry.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

What my noble Friend has stated is perfectly true. On Thursday evening the right hon. Baronet expressed a wish that Sir Baldwin Walker should be detained; but the gallant Admiral by whom the Committee was to be moved for stated in the most distinct manner that there was no necessity to examine Sir Baldwin Walker as evidence amply sufficient for all purposes had already been given by him; and, on grounds of public importance, he agreed that he should proceed to his station without delay. On that I stated to my noble Friend that I was satisfied the gallant Admiral had better go. On the other hand, as there appears to be a desire on the part of those who are to be members of the Committee that Sir Baldwin Walker should be examined, I am satisfied the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty will give directions to have him called back as soon as possible. I have only to add that there has been no desire to withdraw this officer from examination; on the contrary, Her Majesty's Government, I am sure, have no wish except to give the fullest information on every point to which the attention of the Committee may be directed. Steps shall immediately be taken to have him brought back.

Question put, and agreed to; Debate adjourned till To-morrow.