NAVY ESTIMATES, 1894–5. (Hansard, 22 August 1804)

MR. KEARLEY (Devonport)
said, he would like to call attention to the fact that the Marines on board Her Majesty's ships were required to pay for their own white clothing which it was necessary 314 for them to wear at foreign stations. He should be glad to hear that this hardship upon the men would be removed.

THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Sir U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH,) Lancashire, Clitheroe
said, that under a new Rule the practice was to supply each Marine before leaving for a foreign station with two white tunics and two pairs of white drill trousers at the public expense; what he received would doubtless not be sufficient for him for the whole three years of foreign service in a hot climate, and he would have to supplement the supply himself. He should, however, be very happy to confer with his hon. Friend the Member for Devonport, who took such an interest in the Royal Marines, as to any matters connected with their clothing.

MR. KEARLEY
said, that as the House would now shortly adjourn for some considerable time, he should like to call attention to the subject of the manning of the Navy, and press that it should receive somewhat closer attention.

§ MR. SPEAKER
Order, order! The Navy Vote has been passed.

MR. KEARLEY
I am speaking of the policy.

§ MR. SPEAKER
That is out of Order.

SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT
Will it be out of Order to ask the Representative of the Admiralty to take all possible steps in order to make up the great deficiency in the personnel of the Navy, without going into detail as to manning the Fleet?

§ MR. SPEAKER
A question might be asked to that, effect, but any detailed or lengthened inquiry into the subject will be out of Order, inasmuch as the Manning 315 Vote is one of those which have been passed.

MR. KEARLEY
said, he wished to elicit from the representative of the Admiralty some statement on this question, as fears were entertained that the Department was not proceeding as rapidly as might be wished in the matter.

SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH
said, that he made a very full statement on this subject at an earlier period of the Session. He could assure the hon. Member that the very large and increased provisions made in this year's Estimates for the manning of the Navy were being given effect to by the Admiralty with the utmost vigour. They had been extremely successful in some of the points. In the Royal Marines, to which his hon. Friend had just now referred, they had been very successful in adding to the number, and the standard had recently been raised. As he had previously told the House, the Northampton had been commissioned to enrol boys older than those taken on the training ships, and that also was a very encouraging experiment, for the boys were coming in with great rapidity. Generally speaking, they had made a great advance in the direction required. He might, perhaps, be allowed to add that very exaggerated reports had appeared in the newspapers as to the difficulty alleged to have been experienced in providing men for the ships engaged in the recent Naval Manœuvres. There were, in fact, large numbers of men at the disposal of the Admiralty, especially at Portsmouth and Chatham, and in the embarking section of the coastguard, by whom further ships might have been commissioned. The Admiralty hoped in future years, and indeed even by next year, to be in a much better position than at present.

SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT
said, he merely wished to emphasise the question put by the hon. Member for Devonport. He believed that great anxiety was felt throughout the country as to the admitted deficiency in the personnel of the Navy, and it was generally hoped that the Board of Admiralty would do their utmost during the coming year to supply, so far as they could, that very serious deficiency in the number of officers and men.

MR. KEARLEY
said, he desired to call the attention of the Civil Lord to a case into which he knew the hon. Gentleman had been inquiring—namely, that of a man called Deans, who died a few months since. At 60 years of age Deans became entitled to a gratuity; instead of retiring at the age of 60, when entitled to a week's wages for every year's service, he, at the request of the Government, consented to continue in the service to suit their convenience. Within three months he unfortunately died, and instead of the gratuity being given to his relatives for his 25 years' services, the money had been denied altogether. His hon. Friend had, he believed, looked into the question, and he should like to know what had been done? He desired also to draw the attention of the House to a matter in connection with the Navy, which was a burning question. That was the system under which the wives of naval men were compelled to come monthly to the naval establishments for the purposes of drawing the half-pay allotted to them by their relatives on foreign service. A Committee had inquired into the subject, an overwhelming mass of evidence being given in favour of the change, and none in favour of the continuance of the present system. But notwithstanding this, the old practice was being continued. This practice was very much objected to; the husbands objected to their wives being herded together for two hours in a building eminently unsuitable for the purpose, and they objected to the two miles walk to and from to draw the money; but the strongest ground was that it tended to immorality. It was stated in evidence that no fewer than 15 bad characters had money allotted to them, perhaps by a few of the worst characters who happened to get into the Navy, and they attended month by month to draw the money so allotted to them. A respectable man, of 317 course, had the strongest possible objection to his wife having to consort with these people even for a single moment. A Petition had been sent in to the Admiralty, signed by the wives of 1,500 Naval men, praying for an alteration of the system, and not one single representation was made or evidence given in favour of the continuance of the present system. What the men wanted was that their wives should be able to draw the money at the post offices. Years ago the pensioners had a similar grievance, but in their case the desired reform was made, and they now received their pensions through the post office. With regard to pensions now paid quarterly, he urged the necessity of paying them monthly. Long before the next quarterly payment became due the pensioner and his family were often in necessitous circumstances, the fact being that when a pensioner got a large sum in his hand at a time he was sometimes tempted into dissipation, with disastrous results. He also desired to call attention to the question of Greenwich pensions; an arrangement had been made whereby men, when they reached the age of 55 years, should have an augmentation of 5d. a day, but in 1878 a limitation in the number of men was effected. Until 1892 strong agitation was carried on against the action of limitation. The result, then, was the appointment of a Select Committee, which made three recommendations. Two had been carried out, with the result that of the 2,800 men who had been deprived, 2,200 were enabled to receive the pensions to which they were entitled. Still 600 men remained, whose cases, he urged, should be dealt with.

THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. E. ROBERTSON,) Dundee
said, with regard first to the question of the gratuity to the relatives of the man Deans, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, there was a doubt as to the powers of the Admiralty in the matter; it was doubtful whether to give the gratuity was within their powers. He would, however, inquire into the question of the powers of the Admiralty, and if they could they would consider the possibility of making an allowance. With regard to the allotments, he congratulated the hon. Member for Devonport upon being the first to 318 raise the question, and upon the successful result of his efforts, which would undoubtedly be one of the greatest benefits to the families of seamen. The system of paying these allotments to the wives of the seamen by Post Office orders, which they could cash at any time, instead of compelling them to herd in hundreds and thousands at the dockyards, was a change which was approved of by the Admiralty. They were now waiting the sanction of the Treasury with regard to the necessary increase in the staff, but the additional cost would not exceed £480, and he hoped the sanction of the Treasury would be obtained in time for handbills to be sent out next month, and if that were done, the new system would come into operation on October 1. With regard to the question of the payment of pensions monthly instead of quarterly, the hon. Member said that when a pensioner got a comparatively large sum into his hands once a quarter he sometimes got rid of it too soon, with bad results to his family. The Admiralty had been made acquainted with some very painful circumstances of that kind, and he should be very glad to take the suggestion, that the pensions should be paid monthly instead of quarterly, into his consideration and consult his colleagues on the subject. With regard to the question of the Greenwich age pensions, the information of the hon. Member was not correct; the Committee did not recommend that the whole of the men should be considered. They distinguished between them, and made two recommendations, which had been acted upon, at an increase of £22,000 on the Estimates. They made some observations upon a third recommendation, which were being considered. He could promise on behalf of the Admiralty that the whole subject should receive the most careful consideration, but further than that he could not go.