HC Deb 30 June 1836 vol 34 c1066
Sir Edward Codrington

wished to ask a question of the hon. Gentleman, the Secretary for the Admiralty. He perceived that Sir John Barrow, after a certain number of years' service, was to receive a retiring pension of 1,000l. a year, which far exceeded the amount of the pension enjoyed by the oldest post-captain in the navy. It appeared that the officers of the navy, no matter what their services might be, were liable to be "scratched" off the books of the Admiralty at any moment, in the event of their misconducting themselves, or being guilty of unofficer-like or ungentlemanly conduct, and he, therefore wished to know if Sir John Barrow was to stand on the same footing in respect of his pension?

Mr. Charles Wood

said, that, although the Admiralty had the power of erasing from the Navy Lists the name of any office, whose conduct did not become the character of an officer and a gentleman, he did not think the case of Sir John Barrow would come within that rule.

Sir Edward Codrington

wished to know from the hon. Gentleman whether Sir John Barrow was in point of fact to have a vested right in his pension of 1,000l. a year, let his conduct be what it might, at the same time that the name of the oldest and most distinguished officer in the navy was liable to be scratched off the hooks if he misconducted himself? He thought that this was not treating the navy fairly, and he should take an early opportunity of bringing the matter under the consideration of that House.

Subject dropped.