§ Mr. C. Woodmoved that a sum of not less than £.113,924 be voted to Her Majesty for defraying the salaries of the officers and other expenses of the Admiralty-office.
§ Mr. Humewished to put a question to the hon. Secretary to the Admiralty. If he were rightly informed by the public prints, the Hastings, of 74 guns, had some time back been appropriated to attend upon the Queen Dowager on her way to Malta; it had, as he understood, proceeded to Lisbon and to various ports of the Mediterranean, and was now about to return again in attendance on the Queen Dowager in her journey home. He understood there was beside a steamer at her Majesty's disposal. Now, considering that her Majesty, the Queen Dowager, enjoyed an income of 100,000l., paid by the people of this country, he must object to sending 80-gun ships and steamers to attend upon an individual (no more could have been done in the case of her Majesty Queen Victoria herself), at a time when it was alleged that we were in want of ships to protect our commerce in different parts of the world. He wished to know on what principle the Board of Admiralty could defend the appropriation of a line-of-battle ship to such a purpose as this, and he wished to know whether the accounts he had seen were correct in stating that the Hastings was now coming home, after having attended the Queen Dowager.
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid the hon. Member was, to a considerable extent, misinformed in the statement he had made. It was perfectly true that the Hastings had carried her Majesty, Queen Adelaide, to Naples, and subsequently to Malta. Surely the hon. Member did not mean to object to a ship of war attending upon the Queen Dowager of England when she had occasion to go abroad. He could not believe it. However, the hon. Member was mistaken in thinking, as he seemed to do, that in sending out the Hastings they had a vessel the less for the defence of commerce; so far from that vessel not being made available as a ship of war, it had been employed since leaving England in several services, and services totally unconnected with the Queen Dowager. It would, however, return to this country with the Queen Dowager; and though during the period of the voyage, it of course could not be available to the public service, yet it would be immediately upon arriving in port here. The extent, therefore, of the withdrawal of the ship from the public service would be comprised in the periods of the passage out and the passage back. To this, he thought, no hon. Member could seriously object.
§ Mr. Humesaid the hon. Gentleman was very much mistaken, for he did object to it altogether. In his opinion, there could not be a more improper misapplication on the part of the officers of the Admiralty of the power placed in their hands. He did think that it was a very serious matter, when they heard of the ships of war of the country being every where inadequate to protect its commerce. He objected to make the public pay another 100,000l., or whatever the cost of sending this vessel might be, in addition to the large income already paid by the people to her Majesty Queen Adelaide. He wished to know, also, whether a steamer really did accompany her Majesty.
§ Sir C. Adamreplied in the negative. The Hastings had been fitted to convey Lord Durham on a public mission, and the Queen Dowager went out in her, fitted as she was. Upon the Queen's arrival at Malta, the Hastings was employed in the public service, Sir Robert Stopford having sailed in her to Port Mahon, and to the coast of Spain. In fact, the Hastings had formed one of the squadron of ships which was intended to prevent 1200 the Russians from coming to burn Sheerness, as the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. T. Attwood) seemed to expect. As for the expense, surely if there was some expense, no man would say that such an illustrious and excellent person was not deserving of the expense. While on this subject, he might take the opportunity of stating, that the Queen Dowager had insisted that the country should not be put to one farthing's expense for the maintenance of her establishment while at Malta.
§ Captain Pechellsaid, if the hon. Member (Mr. Hume) knew the circumstances of the case, he would be the last man to object to a ship of war accompanying the Queen Dowager on a voyage for the recovery of her health. The state of the fittings of the Royal Yachts rendered them unsuitable for such a service. It was only in a ship of war that accommodations were to be found adapted to a person in her Majesty's delicate condition of health.
§ Sir E. Codringtondid not think it reasonable to object to the appropriation of a ship of war to such a purpose, but he thought that when her Majesty, Queen Victoria signified her pleasure that a ship of the line should wait the orders of her royal Relative, it ought to have been commissioned for the purpose.
§ Sir G. Clerksaid, the hon. Member for Kilkenny was, he believed, the only person in the country who would think of grudging the expense of a ship on such an occasion. With regard to another subject; the employment by the Board of Admiralty of certain line of battle ships of the third rate, and rating them as fourth rates—he begged to offer an observation or two to the House. He felt a very strong objection to the assumption by the Admiralty of the perfectly unconstitutional power, as he believed it to be, of altering in this manner the rates of pay, as fixed by the King in Council, of the officers and petty officers. He doubted whether, constitutionally, the Admiralty had any such power; and he also very much doubted whether the exercise of such power was not illegal; so that, if the officers chose to bring actions against the Admiralty, they would recover the difference of pay. The case of the Cornwallis was one in point; that vessel was a third rate, but was rated as a fourth, and the pay of the men and petty officers on board was altered accordingly. Since that, she had been again 1201 put on the rating of a third rate. He must say the practice was most inconvenient, and likely to create discontent in the navy. He should like to know whether the Admiralty had adopted this system on the authority of their legal advisers. There was certainly no power given the Admiralty by the last order in council on the subject, which would enable them arbitrarily to alter the rates of pay fixed by that. He was quite ready to admit, it might be very convenient for an Admiral going out to a hot climate, such as the West Indies, that his family should be accommodated in a roomy vessel, but such an arrangement ought not to be effected by the Admiralty at the expense of the officers and petty officers.
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid, the petty officers knew perfectly well at entering, what rating their ship was of, and, therefore, what pay they were entitled to receive. They had nothing to complain of. With respect to the concluding remarks of the hon. Baronet, he fully believed that the regulations of which he spoke gave the Admiralty full powers to make these alterations. So far, at least, it was clear that two successive boards of Admiralty had been of this opinion, and had acted upon it.
§ Sir E. Codringtonsaid, that the same thing was done when the hon. Baronet (Sir G. Clerk) was at the Admiralty, and that the flag-ship at Portsmouth was rated in this way.
§ Sir C. Adamsaid, that with respect to the Cornwallis, if she had not gone, a fourth-rate must have gone, and the officers would not have been a bit better off. A principal reason for sending her out was, that in the then state of the West India islands, it was desirable to have a ship on the station capable of conveying a battalion at once from one island to the other. It was quite a mistake to suppose the officers had been unfairly dealt with; they had no less an amount of pay than they would have had in a fourth-rate.
§ Mr. Humeinsisted that he had heard no reason assigned why the people should find a line-of-battle ship to convey the Queen Dowager abroad. He must also refer to the charges for the packet service, which were made out in various different items scattered over upwards of 50 pages of the estimates. The whole amount was 173,623l. He submitted, that the portion of this aggregate which related to the 1202 Post office charges should be so brought forward as that they might have a statement both of the receipts and of the expenditure of the Post-office before them at once. They would then be able to see what was the separate expense of the navy packet department. He wished to know whether the Admiralty intended to adopt his suggestion.
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid, the present was the first occasion on which the several items of the packet service had been given in the estimates in a distinct and separate shape. There could be no difficulty in giving the expense, but it must be broken up into details, which would be very unusual, and for which they were not prepared.
§ Mr. Humesaid, in No. 3, page 11, of the estimates for the Admiralty there was an expense of 950l. for "controller of steam machinery and of the packet service," for salary and house rent. He wished to know what were the duties of that officer, and who that officer was?
§ Mr. C. Wood.Sir E. Parry.
§ Mr. C. Woodreplied he was not. Sir Edward Parry had the management of the whole of the packet service, including the repairs of the machinery; and visited the different stations when necessary. He had discharged the duties of his situation in a most efficient manner and without such assistance it would be impossible for the Board to fulfil the duties which devolved upon it.
§ Mr. Humesaid, Sir Edward Parry was first appointed superintendent of packets, and then controller of steam machinery. He wished to know how it was possible that a captain in the navy could become fit to fill the situation of inspector and controller of steam-engines. In no other country, would they go to the army or navy for a man to fill such an appointment, but would appoint a man bred up to the profession: and, above all, no other country would give such a man a salary, more than was given to the best engineer that the country could afford. He thought, that a most distinguished engineer would have been selected; whereas, he appeared to be an officer of the Navy.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ The next vote proposed was 2,550l. for the office for the Registry of Merchant Seamen.
§ Captain Pechellbegged to draw the 1203 Secretary of the Admiralty's attention to a point which had been the subject of much complaint, namely, the stoppage of pensions for good conduct when the parties returned to active service.
§ Mr. Charles Woodsaid, that the practice was not a new one, nor confined to the Admiralty. On the contrary, it had been a principle acted upon for upwards of twenty years in. all public offices, that no man should receive pension and pay at the same time. He was not prepared to introduce any measure to alter the rule in the present case. In his opinion, whatever objections might be urged against it, he thought that this rule had two good results of no slight importance. In the first place, it tended to keep up a reserve of seamen, upon which the service could draw in time of need; and, secondly, the existence of these pensioners served as an example and an inducement to other seamen to prefer the Queen's to the merchants' service. By a measure, however, which was passed a few years ago, it was provided that where pensioned seamen are called upon by proclamation to serve, they were to be allowed their pensions together with their pay.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 468,059l. be granted for the wages of workmen, &c. in the dock-yards,
Mr. Wolverly Attwoodrose to call the attention of the House to the present inadequate rate of wages allowed to shipwrights in her Majesty's dock-yards, which was inferior to that paid in merchants' yards, and, consequently, the best men would necessarily prefer the private to the public service. Now it was of the highest importance that the public should have the benefit of the most skilful men in this department; it was as essential that the shipwrights should be of the first class as that the materials should be of the best quality, and the ships constructed upon the most perfect plan. While the present disproportion existed between the rate of pay given by the Government and that afforded by private individuals they could not hope to have in the dock-yards the superior description of artisans. In her Majesty's dock-yards there were two classes of men—three out of fifteen were appointed to the first class, and received 4s. 6d. a-day, the remainder of the fifteen received 4s. a-day. The wages paid in merchants' yards on 1204 the River Thames was 6s. a-day, and in addition to that the shipwrights were allowed to take away chips, a privilege at one time enjoyed by the workmen in the Government yard, but which was discontinued, and a compensation of 6d. a-day granted. That compensation, however, was withdrawn, and the worst class of men in the merchants' yards earned as much as the first-class men in her Majesty's dock-yards. The shipwrights, also, had to purchase their own tools out of the wages they earned, while their pensions had been abolished. There was a difference of from thirty to fifty per cent. in favour of the private employment. The same class of workmen could earn in the merchants' yards, if in constant employment, 90l. per annum, 60l. per annum if they remained idle four months in the year, who in the dock-yards could only earn 60l. if they worked every day and every hour. No one who considered the principles by which workmen were commonly regulated could imagine that it was possible, while paying an inadequate rate of wages, to obtain the best class of workmen. And as to those shipwrights who were retained in the public service by the fear of forfeiting the pension, which was only to be acquired by a certain period of service, it was unjust towards them to oblige them to work at a scale of wages which afforded them no fair remuneration for their talents or their experience, and so much below what they could obtain in private dock-yards. He (Mr. W. Attwood) was prepared to state that numbers of skilful workmen had left the public dock-yards, in consequence of their being able to find more profitable employment elsewhere. In Chatham twenty men, of high character, had lately left her Majesty's dock-yard; several at Woolwich; and thirteen had left at Sheerness. And these men could not be replaced with men of equal skill and ability, without increasing the rate of wages. An interview had taken place between the men who had left Chatham dockyard and the Captain-superintendant; and when they were asked their reasons for leaving the dock-yard, they stated that it was entirely owing to the inadequacy of the pay which they had received. To skilful workmen it was exceedingly disagreeable to be paid at a lower rate than the ordinary scale of wages; it placed them in an unfair position, and naturally in- 1205 disposed them to exert themselves with that zeal which they would otherwise display. It was the interest of the country that the dock-yard men should be paid liberally, in order to secure for the public service, the best class of workmen. And if the shipwrights in the public dock-yards were paid at a lower rate than those employed in the private yards, the public service must necessarily be performed by an inferior class of workmen. In bringing this case forward, he (Mr. W. Attwood) did not wish to throw censure on any Government. He attacked the system; and whether it was a Whig Government or a Tory Government against the system were his remarks directed. He hoped the subject would receive the attention of the Admiralty; for one more important had never been brought forward among all the questions which had been discussed relative to the Navy.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas not surprised that the hon. Member should have brought this subject forward. It had not escaped the attention of the Admiralty, by whom a representation had been made to the Treasury, which was still under consideration. Formerly there was a superannuated allowance not only for skilful workmen, but for ordinary labourers. That system was very properly altered. But it was another question, whether the superannuation allowance should be altogether done away with. It was a totally distinct and a very important question, whether it would not be proper to give a retired allowance to the skilled and experienced workmen, in order to secure a sufficient supply of such workmen in the public dock-yards. The Treasury were not indisposed to recommend that a just provision should be made as superannuation allowances, for those skilled and experienced workmen. It would be a very false economy if, by neglecting to make proper provision for such workmen, the public service should be deprived of their assistance. At the same time it should be recollected, that the benefit of the superannuation system was, that it would be an additional inducement to such workmen to remain in the public employment, and they could not expect the advantage both of increase derived from the fluctuations of wages in the private dock-yards, and the certainty of superannuated allowance. And it should also be considered, that men had many 1206 inducements to remain in the public dockyards, from the credit which was naturally felt from employment in her Majesty's service, and he did not think there would be any difficulty hereafter in procuring able workmen for the public dock-yards.
§ Mr. Barnardwas glad to hear, that a superannuated allowance would be granted to able workmen in the public dock-yards—but he did not think this alone would do. He entirely concurred in what had fallen from his hon. Friend. He considered that job work was the life and soul of every business; and he hoped, that system would be adopted in the public dock-yards.
§ Sir E. Codringtonsaid, that the able statement of the hon. Member (Mr. Attwood) had saved him the trouble of making any lengthened speech. He might however, say, that when the dock-yard shipwrights were discontented with their remuneration, they were told by the Admiralty, they might leave if they liked, thus adding insult to injury. By the system of classification at present adopted—by lot—the apprentice was often put over his master. Was that a proper arrangement? He was happy to find, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had intimated his willingness to do something towards removing that discontent which at present existed, and which would leave the dock-yards, perhaps, deserted just at the crisis when able workmen were most required.
§ Sir G. Clerkthought the House and the country were under great obligations to the hon. Member(Mr. W. Attwood) for bringing this subject before them; and it must be gratifying to find that measures were likely to be taken for removing the evils of the present system. He agreed with the hon. Member, that the pay of the shipwrights in the Government dock-yards was not sufficient to insure the services of the most efficient men. Shipwrights were a class of men requiring considerable instruction before they could perform their work well; and in proportion to the skill that was requisite, was the difficulty of obtaining men of that class. Nothing but high wages could secure their services. The work of a shipwright was of a very laborious description, and it was impossible to expect men working at inferior wages to exert themselves so much as they would, if they were paid in proportion to the labour they performed. The system of classification now adopted was most injudicious. At 1207 the time of the peace the workmen had the option of accepting reduced wages or going away, but owing to the depressed state of the merchant shipping, the greater part preferred remaining. The difference then was not so great between the merchants pay and the dock-yard pay as it was now. Formerly the shipwrights were allowed to retire on pensions; but this was no longer the case. Hence two causes were operating unfavourably, not only to the men themselves, but to the parishes in which the dock-yards were situated. He thought it worthy the consideration of the Government whether the system of allowing pensions should not be restored, as well as the pay of the shipwrights be increased. He should also recommend them to do away with the classification, and pay the men by the job.
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid, that no part of his duty since entering office had been more puzzling to him than that which referred to the payment of the workmen in the dockyards. Previous to 1830, the work was done by task and job; but that system was totally set aside by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Pembroke, when First Lord of the Admiralty, who introduced day pay. At the same time it would be extremely unjust to Sir James Graham, if he did not state that the subject was pretty well considered at the time. Whether the information which the right hon. Baronet then received was correct or not as to the rate of wages paid to shipwrights in merchants' yards, he could not say. If the right hon. Baronet were present, he would, no doubt, have been able to satisfy the Committee upon that point. It appeared that he took the trouble to inquire of the principal shipbuilders in the River Thames, at Whitehaven, on the Tyne, and at Liverpool, and that he placed the daily wages of the men in the dock-yards at a rather higher rate than the average of the wages in all those places. One great difficulty attending the paying of all civil servants, unless they were paid by the job, was, that they must necessarily be paid in classes, and this was always to some extent a discouragement to the best workmen. But the Committee ought to bear in mind, that there were many privileges enjoyed by men working in the dockyards which those working in private shipyards did not enjoy. They had medical attendance when hurt, and half-pay during their cure besides superannua- 1208 tion allowances. In the year 1837, when this question was again brought under the consideration of the Admiralty, the same course was adopted as that which Sir James Graham pursued in 1830. The Admiralty made inquiry of the principal ship-builders in different parts of the country, and found then that the wages of the men were much about the same as what persons were earning in private dock-yards, with the addition of those privileges to which he had alluded. With regard to classification, and the statement made by his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Edward Codrington), as to its partial working, he thought that was a fault of the mode in which the system was carried out, and not of the system itself. The system that a limited number of those who were presumed to be the best workmen in the yard should receive higher pay was not unjust. But the complaints which he had heard from the deputations that had come up from the different dock-yards, against the system of classification generally, resolved themselves into a complaint of the rates of wages. One workman had told him, that he hoped no alteration would be made in the system of paying by the day. With regard to the men working by the job; he should be unwilling to adopt that plan again unless they connected it with the system of unlimited earnings. Most undoubtedly that was the best system they could adopt for the benefit of the good workmen, and also for procuring the greatest amount of work. It had never been practised, however, in the dock-yards since the peace, and there was an objection to working everybody to the utmost of their strength in ordinary times, leaving no means of suddenly increasing the amount of work in case of emergency.
§ Colonel Sibthorpthought, that the country were much indebted to the hon. Member for Greenwich for bringing this matter forward, for it was only when these suggestions were made in the House, that the right hon. Gentleman opposite came down and said, "Oh, we intended to do all this." But if the suggestions had not been made, they would not have heard one word from her Majesty's Government that any alteration was contemplated, nor would any alteration be made. He thought, that the higher officers were too well paid for the services they performed; 1209 for instance, there was his hon. Friend (Mr. C. Wood), a very clever man, he had no doubt, but what did he know of naval services? He (Colonel Sibthorp) had told him before, and he repeated it now, that he "would be sea-sick in a punt at Westminster-bridge," and with all his respect for the hon. Gentleman, he must declare, that he could know nothing about the matter.
Mr. W. Attwoodwas glad to hear from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the subject had been brought by the Admiralty under the consideration of the Treasury, and if he had been aware, that there had been any probability of a satisfactory answer being given to the application, he should have considered it inexpedient to bring the matter forward; he had only done it, however, after repeated applications, and after consultation with other Members connected with towns having dock-yards. He trusted, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer's liberality would induce him to do what was requisite to place the shipwrights in the dock-yards on a fair footing. But he must state, that a superannuation allowance alone would not be sufficient. It was necessary, that the pay also should be raised to at least 5s. a day, the pay in private yards being 6s., and the men being sometimes able to earn 7s. or 8s. a day. The present rate had been fixed at a time when the general scale of wages bad been much reduced, and not as the fair average rate of a number of years. With reference to the remarks of the hon. Secretary of the Admiralty, he must state, that there was as much fluctuation in the public as in the private service, the men being sometimes employed six days and sometimes only five days in the week. A great injustice was inflicted by the present system on those shipwrights who, having a claim to pensions, were obliged to remain in the service at whatever rate of pay, in consequence of which, men not so fettered had left the service. Twenty men had left Chatham, thirteen had gone from Sheerness, and it was perfectly clear, that unless more adequate wages were given, none but inferior workmen could be expected to remain. The classification system operated most unfairly, only three men out of fifteen being put in the superior class. It was impossible too, to make any difference between the rate of wages of the same class of men; no difference 1210 could be made between workmen of the same class, except by the introduction of task work. The workmen would rather have lower general rates, than that three or four, who might be with difficulty selected, should receive a higher sum.
§ Mr. T. B. Hobhousewas unwilling to allow the subject to be dropped without expressing the pleasure he felt at its having been mooted by the hon. Member; there was not one Member for a town having a dock-yard, that did not, like himself, wish to see the workmen adequately remunerated.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the vote of 856,637l. for naval stores for the building, repair, and outfit of the fleet, &c., including the purchase of timber, stores, and all other materials; purchase or hire of ships and vessels; of steam machinery; and for freight and sundry expenses connected with naval stores being proposed.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that great complaints had been made of the reduction in the quantity of stores, but if the reduction had been made at the proper time, at the end of the war, many millions of the public money would have been saved. He had some years ago disputed this point with Mr. Croker, and he had then stated, that 22,000,000l. had been spent in building ships, and that the average expenditure for stores was 2,000,000l. a-year; he now held in his hand a statement, that 39,469,000l., had been spent in stores, in building ships, and in wages between the years 1816 and 1838. He begged, therefore, that the Government would not be led away by the statement of the right hon. Member for Pembroke, that we ought to have eighty-four ships of the line, and, of course, other ships in proportion. They ought rather to consider how many they could man in case of emergency; whilst we did not want the same number of ships as all the world beside, we should well man those we had in commission. He believed that the navy would have plenty of good seamen, if they were paid as high wages in the public service as in other services. There was no doubt that the improvements in the navy which had taken place during the last twenty years, and the advantages now given to the sailors would command the best men if we were a little more liberal to them; but in order to do this hon. Members must look at the amount that 1211 was thrown away upon the officers. There were 5,000 officers from the rank of lieutenant to that of admiral, and during the time so many were receiving payment, not more than 700 were employed, so that for every officer employed there were six idle. Only let them see the amount of money thus taken, and how the navy was crippled to give promotion to officers, and satisfy the urgent demands of Members of Parliament. ["No, no," and "It is true."] He was glad to find that this was now admitted by naval officers, for when he had formerly asserted the same thing it had been denied. He told the Government, therefore, that no good would be done till they put an end to all promotions that were not really required and deserved. So far from there being any defect in the pay of the officers, they were paying five millions a-year, and yet they were told the other evening, that there were not officers enough to man five sail of the line. He recollected once when there was a committee up-stairs, a gallant Officer not now in his place, had said, "only think of Waterloo; we ought always be prepared for such a contest." He did not blame the gallant Officer for saying so, and doubtless, many naval Officers in the House would, in like manner, wish to keep up a large naval force, always ready to fight such a battle as that of Trafalgar; but he wished to draw their attention to the deliberate report of the Committee of 1817, which Lord Castlereagh had drawn up, and the report of 1828, on the naval estimates, in which it was laid down, that in a time of peace we ought to husband our resources, and that we were not again to anticipate such a war as that we had been lately engaged in. We ought to pay more attention to commerce; we ought to look upon other nations as our friends and not as enemies, and we ought to trust to the influence of friendly intercourse instead of acting as in times gone by, when popular songs and cries were freely circulated to rouse the feelings of the people, and to make them believe that all the nations were our enemies. He was sorry to find so many years' stores laid by, for there must be much loss from decay, and he could not account for any such sum as proposed for the purposes required. By a return he had formerly moved, it appeared that we had twenty years' store of gunpowder, we had also twenty years' supply of top- 1212 masts and spars, and he wanted to know what was the use of twenty years' supply of anything?
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid, that the principal reason of there being such a heavy stock of top-masts and spars on hand arose from the circumstance, that they were really using up the old stores, a great part of which had been in the yard for twenty years. These spars were useful for many purposes, and kept fresh for a great length of time; while it was difficult to get them of the best quality.
§ Sir E. Codringtonobserved, that he recollected a ship coming out when he was on service in the Mediterranean, and on examining her condition he found it necessary to condemn the whole of her spars and rigging. But the real thing wanted was to get the best seamen: they could easily obtain ships and stores provided they could procure able-bodied seamen.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the motion being made, that a sum of 159,992l. be granted for new works and improvements and repairs in the yards,
§ Mr. Humeobjected to the vote, and particularly to 25,000l. for a dock at the west end of the yard at Woolwich. He had ascertained, that a sum of four millions sterling had been applied under this branch of the estimates since the peace, and he was afraid, that many of the works now in progress, had been very inconsiderately commenced.
§ Sir George Clerkconfessed, that he felt strong objection to vote such sums for new works at Woolwich. He observed, that the estimates for Woolwich exceeded 60,000l. He wished also to have an explanation of the vote for Portsmouth. There were two sums of 15,000l. and of 93,000l., in all 108,000l., under this branch; the latter sum being required to complete the works, although, only 15,000l. was asked for the service of the present year.
§ Mr. C. Woodreplied, that with regard to Woolwich the great object which the Admiralty had in view was to form a yard there, for constructing steam engines for her Majesty's steam ships. The proximity of Woolwich to the best manufactories made it most desirable to form a concentrated establishment of that description, which would be found of great advantage to the public service. And in reference 1213 to the sums wanted for Portsmouth it would be seen, that the expense was chiefly required for repairing the sea wall. It would be a work of three or four years duration. The fact was, that the sea wall was going from one end to the other, having been built on mud without being piled. They would require, indeed, almost to rebuild the wall, and the cost of that, together with the construction of two new slips which were necessary, made the vote amount to the sum stated in the estimate, which would be expended in annual portions till the whole was completed.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ The next vote proposed, was 282,230l. for half-pay to officers of the navy and royal marines, in addition to 500,000l. voted previously for the same service.
§ Mr. Humestated, that he had strong objections to the principle involved in this vote. By the system of promotion in the naval service, we had 5,000 officers on half-pay, while we never had more than 700 actually employed. He should wish to have a return of the number of officers on half-pay, with a statement also of their respective number of years' service, that they might see the extent to which they were burdened with continued annuities. He regretted much to see old officers of long service passed over, and young men put over their heads. He had very strong objections to the system of promotion, and had documents to show the injustice of it, but seeing the thin state of the House, and the apathy evinced by hon. Members, for there had not been forty Members present almost since they commenced to debate these estimates, he really had no encouragement to enter upon any detail of the subject. He would, therefore, content himself for the present by protesting against the system of promotion adopted by the Admiralty.
§ Sir Edward Codrington,on a former occasion, had taken occasion to contrast the remuneration paid to officers in the navy compared with those in the civil departments of the Government. When he looked at the question in that light it was not enough to say, that it was unjust to officers on half-pay, because it was not within the name of common justice. The officers on half-pay were most shamefully remunerated, for there was not one officer in any civil department of the State who did not receive double remuneration for half the same period of service. He did 1214 not allude to men who had not seen hard service, but he spoke of such men as Sir Samuel Hood, Admiral Keates, and others—men who had performed the most brilliant actions—who were never out of employment—who had been all their lives at sea, and whose services to their country never could be excelled. Either, then, it was not right to give so much remuneration to civilians, or more should be given to naval officers. He trusted that the commission now sitting on both services would not overlook this hardship, and that something would be done by the commissioners. With respect to the system of promotion in the navy, he thought it most objectionable. It was all in the hands of the First Lord of the Admiralty, who did as he thought fit, and who made it a matter of Parliamentary interest. What did the First Lord know of the merits of officers in the service? It was all managed by him as a matter of patronage. He had heard it said, that this was unavoidable, otherwise they would not get fit persons to make the sacrifices necessary in accepting such a situation. He did not understand what sacrifice was involved in the question at all, seeing that the First Lord was entitled to a pension of 2,000l. a year after two years' service. He felt called upon to enter his general protest against so objectionable a system of dispensing promotion to officers in the navy.
§ Captain Pechellcomplained that there was no half-pay to midshipmen. That numerous and most meritorious, but ill requited class of officers, placed a firm reliance in the proceedings of the military commission, to whom reference had been already made. He trusted that the hon. Member, the Secretary for the Admiralty, would give some assistance in the matter, and he begged to know whether Government would do anything for them?
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid, that he had no knowledge whatever of the proceedings of the commission to which the gallant Officer had alluded, and he thought it would be better to postpone saying anything further until the report of the Committee was on the Table of the House. As regarded the complaints which had been made by hon. Members at the manner in which promotions had taken place in the navy, he thought that there was no good reason for the remarks which had been made. The noble Lord at the head of the Admiralty had paid his utmost attention to investi- 1215 gate the claims and merits of officers, and he held in his hand a return of the number of lieutenants who had been promoted for the last nine years, arranged in two classes—the first being those who had been promoted for services, and the other consisting of those who had been promoted for any other cause. Now, the proportions which the first class bore to the second class was as follows:—For the year 1830, one-third; 1831, one-half; 1832, one-quarter; 1833, one-third; 1834, one-half; 1835, two-thirds; 1836, one-half; 1837, one-half and more; 1838, two- thirds.
§ Sir E. Codringtonsaid, that the hon. Secretary for the Admiralty had shown, that the First Lord of the Admiralty exercised an enormous amount of official and irresponsible patronage.
Sir C. Adamsreplied, that his noble Friend at the head of the Admiralty made it an uniform rule to consult the other Lords at the Board of Admiralty, and they gave him their best advice. His noble Friend spared no pains or trouble in the investigation of the claims of officers, and was solely influenced by the consideration of their merits. He would not say, that his noble Friend never promoted a friend—that would be absurd; and no one could expect that any person holding the appointment of his noble Friend would not occasionally serve a Friend. But this he would say at the same time, that there never was a man filling that high office who took more pains to make himself acquainted with the claims of officers, and to make merit the rule of his official conduct.
§ Sir Edward Codringtonrepeated his objections to the system of promotion in the navy; and as an instance of its unfairness, mentioned, that the First Lord had promoted the three sons of a captain now living, passing over the son of Captain Bathurst; and there was the son, also, of Admiral Brown, who had been a lieutenant now for ten or eleven years.
§ Mr. Humeobserved, that the doctrine stated by the gallant Admiral was most startling. He thought, that the noble Lord, the Earl of Minto, held the high office of First Lord of the Admiralty to serve his country, but it seemed from what the gallant Admiral had said, that he held it only to serve his friends.—[Admiral Adams had stated nothing of the kind.] He certainly understood the gallant Ad- 1216 miral to have admitted that the noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty did occasionally use his official patronage to serve a friend. Had it been a case of two men of equal claims in which the noble Lord was represented to have given the preference to one of them as a private friend, he would not have thought so much of it, but the gallant Admiral did not make that statement. The Queen of England could not burden the country with a pension of 50l. without the approval of that House. But the First Lord of the Admiralty was under no such limitation. There were 4,000 officers on half-pay, and not one of them ought to be promoted except for good services. The system avowed by the gallant Admiral was fixing a heavy burden on the country. A public man who avowed that he served his friends did not serve his country.
Sir Charles Adamsremarked that the hon. Member for Kilkenny had not attended to what he had said. He had not stated that his noble Friend had ever officially served a friend. What he did say was, that his noble Friend had occasionally promoted a friend, and he defied any one to point out an instance where the officer promoted did not deserve it.
§ Mr. Charles Woodsaid, that the document which he had read, was the best answer to the charge that the noble Lord had bestowed his official patronage in any other way than from a just consideration of the merits of officers.
§ Sir Edward Codringtonhad on a previous occasion alluded to the hard case of the lieutenants. There were 300 lieutenants at the head of the list who were entitled to 7s. a day, but they had not received that allowance, although entitled to it. He wished, therefore, to see the Order in Council on the subject, and meant to ask for that document.
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid that, with reference to the lieutenants who had been taken from the top of the list and placed on the list of commanders, they were perfectly aware of the effect of the arrangement, and they were offered that rank if they chose to accept it at the same pay.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the motion that 12,540l. be granted for military pensions and allowances.
§ Mr. C. Woodsaid, in answer to a question from Capt. Pechell, that he had stated a few evenings ago that he believed a pension was vacant. On inquiry he found 1217 that that was the case, and that the Board of Admiralty had met that morning and bad conferred it on Captain Napier.
§ Sir E. Codringtonreferred to the difference in the allowance to the lieutenant-governors of Greenwich and Chelsea hospitals. Both of the officers that held those appointments were very distinguished for their services; the lieutenant-governor of the former was Admiral Sir Jahleel Brenton, and of the latter was General Sir G. Walker. The advantages that the latter enjoyed over the former, however, were very considerable. Sir G. Walker was colonel of the 57th. regiment, and received emoluments from that and other sources; whereas Sir Jahleel Brenton was not allowed to receive his half-pay while he held the appointment. The duties of Greenwich also were much more onerous than those at Chelsea. For instance, the number of pensioners at Greenwich was 2,710, while only 500 resided at Chelsea. He understood that when Sir Jahleel Brenton accepted the appointment, he consented to give up his half-pay as rear-admiral; he, therefore, did not complain of this individual case, but he protested against such a difference in the system with respect to the two establishments. In almost every respect the advantage that military men enjoyed over naval officers was very great. He contended that there should be as nearly as possible an equality.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the vote for 150,954l. for the freight of ships for the conveyance of troops, &c., for the army and navy departments,
§ Alderman Thompsoncomplained of the expense of fitting out old men-of-war as transports or troop ships. The expense was infinitely greater than that of hiring ships from private persons.
§ Mr. Woodsaid, that the subject had already received his attention, but that while the expense incurred on behalf of the public was considered, the health of the troops must also be remembered. The existing regulation was matter of economy in fact, for if a transport were employed the troops would be subjected to inconvenience and want of comfort; whereas when a troop ship was used they would be landed in good health, which was of the highest importance. A saving of time, and consequently of expense, was also effected; and while transports would not be entirely given up, it was thought exceedingly ad- 1218 visable that troop ships should be generally introduced.
§ Vote agreed to and the House resumed.