HC Deb 01 March 1844 vol 73 cc467-87

On the Question that a sum not exceeding 544,960l. be granted to Her Majesty to defray the Expense of victualling Her Majesty's Navy and Marines,

Dr. Bowring

said, he thought when the House was called upon to vote more than half a million of money in one sum, they had a right to expect more detailed information of the manner in which it was to be expended than was furnished in their estimates. The different articles required and their cost should be stated.

Captain Pechell

said, that before he should agree to this grant he was desirous of having some explanation from the gallant Admiral opposite on the part of the Board of Admiralty, with reference to a few points connected with the Naval service. First, he wished to know if, in the local newspapers it was true, that Naval officers and the ships of Her Majesty's Navy were employed on the West coast of Ireland, in the enforcement of the Poor-rates, and in compelling Boards of Guardians to make a second rate before the first was collected. This was said to have taken place at Westport; and it was also stated, that the Earl of Lucan, chairman of the Board of Guardians at Castlebar said, that he would encourage every resistance to a second rate. The hon. and gallant Member read extracts from Castlebar and Galway newspapers, to the effect, that Poor-rate collectors had been regularly embarked, with policemen, as protectors, on board Her Majesty's war-steamers; and only a storm had, by the sea-sickness it occasioned among the land-lubbers, prevented the disagreeable consequences that might have ensued from such unseemly attempts to coerce the collection of rates by the means of thirty-six pounders. Brat for the "flag of truce," which had been hung out between himself and the right hon. Gentleman at the Home Office, he should cer- tainly dwell upon this discreditable appropriation of our gallant Naval forces to so distasteful a service; as it was, he would only observe, that when the right hon. Gentleman contemplated the extension of his system into districts at present free from Somerset House despotism, he should consider the inconveniences which might result from having to enforce his scheme by the employment of war-steamers on the English coast. He would now come to another subject, the equipment of our war-steamers; and he must say he thought there had been great neglect in applying the principle of the Archimedean screw, which had not had a fair trial; because if it had, he was satisfied it could have been adopted with the greatest safety and success. The Rattler steamer had been set apart for trying experiments with that screw, but he believed she was employed in trying the experiments of Mr. Brunel and other parties, to the detriment of Mr. Smith. They had ample proof of the superiority of the Archimedean screw, because the French steamer Archimede, commanded by the Prince de Joinville, which accompanied Her Majesty from Treport, had beaten all the other vessels of the squadron, except the Royal yacht. Then, again, he wished to know what was to be done with respect to the Great Britain, that had been built in dock, at Bristol, and when she was finished it was discovered that the dock entrance was so small she could not be got out. There she was caught in a mouse-trap. He believed the present was the most convenient time to call the attention of the Committee to the grievances of naval officers, and he would refer, in the first place, to the Masters. The rank of lieutenant was nominally open to them, but they seldom had it conferred upon them; and felt serious dissatisfaction when they found young gentlemen put over the heads of men who had, perhaps, commanded vessels when the youngsters were unborn. He must mention, however, with great approbation, the promotion of one, the master of the Nemesis, Mr. Hall, who had been engaged in our Chinese operations. That promotion certainly did high honour to the Admiralty and great credit to the service. The clerks, he considered, had not justice done to their merits, for they were doomed to all the hardest work, and had not the honours of the commission opened to them, having nothing to look to but a pursership. When a gallant officer was acting Lord of the Admiralty, matters in these respects should be improved. He could not help alluding to the case of one who had served with hint on board a brig under the gallant Officer during the last American war, and who was now no higher than a secretary at Woolwich, where he got hard work on only 150l. a year. He condemned the plan of discharging the boys from the Navy, after the term of their apprenticeship had expired, and he thought some regulations ought to be adopted for their re-entry. When there was some difficulty in getting good seamen, they ought to keep in the service those boys who had already acquired some knowledge of gunnery. The rule was to take no boys for the service under 98lb. weight, and he believed that the boys coming from the Gilbert Unions and unions under local acts were generally full weight; while those coming from other unions were short weight. The gallant Officer also condemned the use of the ten-gun brigs.

Sir G. Cockburn

would endeavour to answer upon every point that had been submitted to the House. The hon. and gallant Member began his speech by finding fault with the Board, for, as it was alleged, permitting their steam-vessels to be employed in the collection of the Poor-rates. He (Sir George Cockburn) told the hon. and gallant Captain, that if he knew of his own knowledge that such was the fact, he would not contradict him. But he could assure him, that he had not heard anything on the subject, and he did not believe it. There was, no doubt, a considerable force on the western coast of Ireland, which had orders to assist and support the magistrates and civil authorities and, their presence might, therefore, have had a moral effect in enabling the civil authorities to collect the Poor rates or other dues, but he had not heard and did not believe, that any naval officer had been employed collecting Poor rates as stated by the hon. and gallant Officer [Captain Pechell: "No."] he (Sir G. Cockburn) appealed to the House whether the gallant Officer had not so stated. In all places on the coast of Ireland, where their ships were moored, the officers were all very well treated, and the people, who came in great numbers on board, appeared much pleased with the sight, and showed no symptoms of ill-feeling, and our officers when a-shore received every mark of respect from all classes: but inquiry should be made as to whether any officer of the Navy had so employed himself as the hon. and gallant Member had insinuated. The next point that was dwelt upon was, that in reference to the Masters. Neither the hon. and gallant Commodore (Sir C. Napier), nor the hon. and gallant Captain, could have a greater respect for this class of men than he had. He did not agree, however, in opinion with them, that the masters ought to be placed exactly in the same rank as lieutenants. The Admiralty had placed the master of a line-of-battle ship upon a higher amount of pay than the first lieutenant of the ship. The other masters were placed on exactly the same amount of pay as the other lieutenants. If they put the masters in the same situations as lieutenants, they would be doing away with that principle upon which the service had hitherto been conducted. That principle was, that these officers should pass through a certain time of servitude before they were made lieutenants, but the masters might have been in the merchant service, and from thence go into a man-of-war at once with the rank of master. He thought that this was a different line altogether to that marked out for lieutenants, and he considered that, for the good of the service, it was fitting that it should be so. The masters in the merchant service were brought up in all the hard work of seamen; most of them had served their apprenticeship. They were excellent men, and no doubt very valuable, but still, as he before said, their line was somewhat different from the other classes of the profession. They were sometimes made lieutenants and captains when they signalised themselves by some particularly gallant action, or performed some good service to the country, but these cases were the exceptions, and not the general rule. He did not, however, wish it to be supposed, that he said anything disparagingly of that class of men. He had no such intention, but, on the contrary, wished to give them every satisfaction that was in his power to obtain for them. It was at present under the consideration of the Board as to how their situation could be possibly improved. The next subject of observation from the hon. and gallant Member was the Archimedean screw. With respect to that, the Board were only anxious, before they laid out much money in its general adoption, to ascertain the fullest advantages that were to be gained from it, and the greatest improvements that could be made in it. Mr. Smith and Mr. Brunel had agreed to act together in their exertions to discover what was the best description of screw, and he hoped that some material improvements would yet be made, and it was the intention of the Admiralty on the termination of the present experiments, to test the merits of Mr. Steinman Steinman's propeller. Whichever proved to be the best, the Admiralty would adopt. The screw, as hitherto tried, was, after all, a very awkward arrangement, it occupied a large space of the body of the vessel, leaving it only connected by the keel, and consequently rendering the vessel proportionately weak. His impression, however, was, that they would arrive at the knowledge of a screw which would be better than the paddle-wheels. It was only about two or three days ago, that an officer of the Navy had called upon him and said, that he had just come from Edinburgh, where he saw a vessel of seven or eight horse power with a horizontal wheel in her bottom, which enabled her to go at the rate of about eight knots an hour. This vessel was described as a very great improvement, and he had sent down one of the chief engineers to look at it. As to the steam boats, various improvements were daily suggested, Government were trying every thing they possibly could to improve them. They saw of what great importance they must very soon become, and they were endeavouring to find out the best description for sea service, and he had no doubt, that in the event of war, we could turn out a better and a stronger fleet of steam-boats than they could on the other side of the water. With respect to the secretaries to Commodores, the gallant Officer was mistaken. In 1838, an order was made, that the clerk to the Senior Officer at Woolwich, and on the coast of Africa, should receive a salary of 150l. a-year each, but they were not entitled to be considered as Secretaries of Flag Officers. With respect to the particular case which the gallant Officer had mentioned, the individual in question, who, he understood, was a good officer, had written to him (Sir G. Cockburn), describing the hardship of his situation, and he (Sir G. Cockburn) proposed to appoint him as a purser, but he stated that he was so circumstanced that he could not serve again afloat, and, therefore sought only for an appointment upon the establishment of the Dockyards. He had accordingly given in his name to the First Lord of the Admiralty, with whom that patronage lay, and he hoped that he would be placed in a situation on that establishment. The next point of the gallant Officer's speech was with respect to the boys. Now these boys were allowed to enter for five years if they wished, and they were kept for that time. As to allowing them to continue permanently in the Navy, it should be recollected, that the Admiralty were tied down to a particular number of men and boys, and they could not keep the boys to the exclusion of men, particularly when they wanted men to man their ships. It was impossible for the gallant Officer to know the claims which were made upon the Admiralty from all parts of the world for ships; and, tied down as he was to a certain number of men, it was impossible to keep more boys in the service. Besides, even if he were able to do so, he was not sure that it would be the wisest course. He was one of those who, after great experience, thought that it was valuable in this country that seamen should run the tour from the Navy to merchant ships, and back again from merchant ships to men-of-war. On board men-of-war they took great pains to instruct the men in gunnery, and when men were paid off they took their turn in the merchant service, having some knowledge of gunnery. Others came into the Navy in their places, and also obtained a knowledge of gunnery, so that if a war should come they would find a large number of seamen in the merchant service possessing a competent knowledge of gunnery. There was another thing—when men went from the Navy into the merchant service, they got some hard rough work, and not so well fed and taken care of, this made them anxious to get back to the Navy; besides which this circulation of men kept up a good feeling between the Navy and the merchant service, and was rather, therefore, a benefit than otherwise. The next point was relative to captain's clerks. The case of the clerks was considered by the Naval and Military Commission of which Lord Minto and others of the then Board of Admiralty were members. But there was this difference between clerks and others—that the clerk was chosen by the captains. If a captain wanted to benefit a man, he took him on board and made him his clerk, and he was responsible to the captain, and to nobody else, and when the captain moved about, he took his clerk with him wherever he went, without asking leave of any one. Therefore, though a clerk might be a long time in the service, yet it should be recollected, that he was not brought into it originally through the Admiralty, they therefore had not quite the same claims on the public as others, but by continuing in the Service, they rose to be Pursers, Secretaries, &c. He did not recollect what was the pay of a clerk, but he knew there were no class of persons from whom he received so many applications for employment, from which it might be inferred, that their situation was not a bad one. The next point was with respect to the ten-gun brigs: he thought that those vessels had been very much maligned in that House. He had had a great number of those vessels under his orders, and had found them to be good little vessels. Those vessels were only dangerous from the inattention of those commanding them, by carrying too much sail, and when there was not a good crew of active seamen on board to take in sail quickly. He had often seen them in company with him make better weather in gales than the eighteen-gun brigs, and he knew of a ten-gun brig which sailed from Plymouth on a surveying expedition round Cape Horn, and a snore violent or desperate sea could not be met anywhere. That vessel remained out for four years, and brought home the identical topmasts and top gallant-masts which she had taken out. Now, he did not think that the same could be said of any eighteen-gun brig. There had also been an instance in the China seas where a ten-gun brig withstood a typhoon, whilst an eighteen-gun brig was laid on her broadside, and nearly lost. However, although he had seen ten-gun brigs make very good weather, and had known them to be most useful, still he admitted that they were vessels he did not entirely admire, for in very few instances were they to be relied on as good sailers. They were now getting rid of them as fast as they could, and substituting vessels of a better construction, and which would sail better. He had now, he believed, answered the different points to which the gallant Officer had referred and he trusted he had shown there was no ground for the complaints that he had advanced.

Captain Pechell

wished to explain. He had not said that the Officers of the men-of-war on the coast of Ireland actually went themselves to assist in the collection of Poor-rate, but he had stated that the ships themselves had been made offices for the collection of the rate.

Sir C. Napier

said, that it was greatly to be regretted, that when the House was in Committee, about to vote away millions of money, there should be so thin an attendance of Members, for frequently since the House had gone into Committee, there were scarcely more than forty Members in the House. He also noticed, that whenever the House went into Committee upon the Navy Estimates, the reporters shut up their books immediately, and the country was left totally ignorant of the grounds on which millions of the public money were voted away. He denied that it was the wish of himself or his gallant Friend to throw obstacles in the way of the gallant Admiral opposite. His only motive was to benefit the Navy. There were a few points connected with the present Vote to which he wished to call attention. He thought it would be a great improvement, if, instead of paying seamen thirteen months' wages in the year, that they should be paid for twelve months, and that their wages should be raised to 2l. per month. This would be a small additional expense and a great benefit to the seamen. He would then go to work with the petty officers, than whom no class of men were more necessary to keep up the discipline of the Navy. He believed that the mutiny of 1797 would never have occurred, or would have been easily put down, had the petty officers at that time been better paid and better treated. He would propose that the first class of petty officers should receive double the pay of the common seamen, and that the second class should receive one-and-a-half the pay of a common seaman. He also wished that there should be an improvement in the mode of paying seaman. The sailor was allowed to draw his wages in slops and necessaries. He was generally careless, and, after returning from long service, be found often that he had drawn the greater part of his wages, and had often only a few pounds coming to him, which were not sufficient to support him until he got another ship. He thought that some change of the present system was worthy of the consideration of the gallant Admiral. He now came to the boys. It appeared that no boy would be allowed to enter who did not weigh ninety-eight pounds, and if those boys got into good ships with good officers, they were treated with the greatest kind- ness; their education was looked after, their moral conduct was watched over, and they were taught seamanship; but after a certain age they were dismissed. They came home at seventeen—to use a vulgar expression—"Hobble-de-hoys, neither men nor boys." These boys very often could not get ships. They came up to London, and crowded the lodging-houses frequented by their class, where they were taught every description of vice. They were taught to drink and chew tobacco—they had a fiddler to play for them and women to dance with them, and they were made adepts in every kind of vice. He thought, that whatever money it might cost, the Government was bound to take these boys on board the flag ships, and provide for them in preference to introducing new hands into the service. With respect to pensioned seamen, he thought the present Government went too far in allowing them their pension and their pay together—it would be a better arrangement to allow them increased wages, say 25l. a year. In his opinion, twenty-one years was too long a period for a sailor to look forward to for a pension, and it would be much better if he got a pension at the end of fourteen years' service. Relative to Masters, he thought that Lieutenants, who had not interest to get on, ought to be allowed to enter the Merchant service, in order to qualify themselves to become Masters, and he was sure that that arrangement would secure them good officers to fill the situation of Master. With respect to ten-gun brigs, nothing would convince him that they were good vessels, and he was glad they were getting rid of them. He (Commodore Napier) was glad to find that it was intended in future not to keep officers and vessels idle in port, but to send them to sea for exercise. The gallant Admiral said, they were to be sent on summer cruises, but he (Commodore Napier) hoped they would be sent on winter cruises. Summer cruises were not what made good sailors, but let them be sent in winter to cruise off the Hebrides, and there they would see what a gale of wind was.

Mr. W. Williams

complained of the want of information regarding the details of this Vote. He thought it very hard that the rate of promotion in the Royal Marines should be so slow. He knew Officers who had been in that corps for forty years, and had attained no higher rank than that of Captain.

Mr. Tufnell

called the attention of the Board of Admiralty to the claims of a most meritorious class of Officers in Her Majesty's dockyards, the inspectors of shipwrights. These Officers performed duties of a more responsible nature than the quarterman, having to superintend two gangs twenty men and boys each, instead of one gang of twenty-five men, who used to be under the quarterman's superintendence. The quarterman's pay was from 160l. to 180l. a year, whilst the inspector of shipwrights had only 100l. Their duty was to appoint the men to their work, to see that it was properly executed, and to keep the men to their tasks. When the salary was first fixed only five days' work in the week was required of them. They have now to work eight days, whilst their salary remains the same, besides which they had no allowance for working extra hours, when extraordinary exertions might be required as for docking and grounding ships. But besides the lowness of their salary, their superannuation was calculated on too reduced a scale for forty years' service—twenty as workman, ten as leading man, and ten as inspector, they were only entitled to 13–14ths of their pay as superannuation, or 32l. 10s. a year; whereas, by working for the same time in an inferior situation, they would be entitled to nearly the same amount of retirement. In some cases, he understood, they would even have less superannuation than if they had continued as working men. A shipwright who had served twenty years received a retiring allowance of 20l. per annum, whilst if, in addition to these twenty years, he had served anything less than fifteen years as inspector, he would only be entitled to 25l. per annum, or 5l. in addition for fourteen years' service. He brought the case of this deserving class of officers before the House in no party spirit, but solely from a sincere desire to do justice to men who discharged responsible duties for which they were ill-remunerated, and should leave the matter in the hands of his hon. Friend the Secretary of the Admiralty and the First Naval Lord in full confidence, that if, in considering the case, they agreed with him in thinking the remuneration of the inspectors inadequate, they would (notwithstanding the suggestion might come from his side of the House), rise the salary of this class of officers in proportion to the work and responsibility which were imposed upon them.

Mr. Sidney Herbert

was not prepared to say that he agreed in the inadequacy of the salary enjoyed by the inspectors, but thought that their scale of superannuation was calculated, perhaps, on too low a basis, and would consider their case.

Vote agreed to.

On the question that a sum of 126,826l. to defray the Salaries of Officers and contingent Expenses in the Admiralty Offices, be granted to Her Majesty,

Captain Rous

wished to make a few observations on the state of the Navy gene rally. It was part of the calculations of the Admiralty, he believed, that in case of war they could command the services of about 800 steamers in the Navy or Merchant-service, who would be able to sweep the narrow seas. Now, he should like much to know whether there were 200 officers in the Navy who had been brought up to know anything of steam-engines or machinery, or about the management of a steam-ship. At least, one-half of Her Majesty's steamers were commanded by officers who could know nothing whatever of steam machinery, and, who, consequently, instead of commanding their own ships, were the mere servants of their own engineers, and utterly incapable of seeing that any necessary evolution was properly performed. As to the complements of the sailing-vessels and their officers in manœuvring, he recollected the anecdote which had been told by the hon. and gallant Commander opposite, who said that when on the coast of Syria an evolution had been performed by the French squadron in a style so admirable that the British ships could not match it. He regretted, as a man who had been at sea for thirty years, that we should have any cause to shrink from competition with the French, a people who had been inferior to us for 500 years. Nothing could be more absurd than to employ officers to command ships who had been twenty years on shore, while young and active officers were laid on the shelf. He had said this himself to Lord Haddington, and told him that while this system was acted upon, it was impossible they could have one man fit to command a ship. He had often seen line-of-battle ships get under weigh with 500 or 600 men, in a manner so shameful and disgraceful, that it was enough to make the tears stand in a seaman's eyes. The French, owing to the great care and pains which their Govern- ment had bestowed of late years on the education and practice of the Officers, and the manning of the ships, could now get under weigh in a manner to extort the admiration of their rivals. Officers of twenty-five years standing were considered too young for employment in the British service; he remembered that, some two or three years ago, the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had told himself and the gallant Commodore opposite, that they were too young to have an opinion on a naval question. Yet the right hon. and gallant Officer had commanded a fleet before he was of his (Captain Rous's) age, and he was now fifty years old. In the navy no man was allowed to have arrived at the years of discretion until he could no longer see with his own eyes, hear with his own ears, or chew with his own teeth. He wished to say a word as to the ships which were now in process of construction, chiefly on Sir W. Symonds' principle. He would venture to prophesy that this system would share the fate of many former systems, and that the surveyor's ships, on which so many millions had been expended, would one day only be fit for firewood. In 1808, when he entered the service, the 74-gun ships of the same class as the Forty Thieves, were the best ships in the service, except the captured French 80's, of the class of the Malta, Canopus, &c. In course of time they were condemned, and became a bye-word. The 10-gun brigs were at one time considered the best and swiftest ever built, and had superseded the old 14-gun brigs. In the American war we built corvettes so narrow, that they could not stand up under canvass. The first that went to sea very nearly foundered in a gale of wind, and when the captain reported this, and added, that it was one of the severest gales of wind he had ever witnessed, the Admiralty turned round upon him, and said, "No wonder then if it was the case, for any vessel would be nearly lost in such a gale." All the Captains after this reported favourably, for it was well known that the Admiralty did not relish cold water being thrown on any of their projects. The 28-gun frigates, of 500 tons, since known as the donkey-frigates, were at one time considered as desirable ships, he had himself commanded one for four years, in which he had sailed 81,000 miles. He reported to the Admiralty that it would make a fine merchantman, but, that as a man-of-war, it was a disgrace to the country, and he found to his astonishment, that there were only two others who had reported unfavourably, because they knew that they would ruin their prospects if they did. The 18-gun brigs were famous in the service for their excellent qualities, and were converted into ships; this was known to be an Admiralty whim, and every man reported favourably of them, except Captain Dundas, son to the First Lord of the Admiralty, who wrote word back, that they had spoiled a very fine brig, and turned her into a very bad ship. This Officer was written to, both privately and publicly, by Mr. Croker, to withdraw his letter, but he insisted that he was right, and right he certainly was, for there was not a single dissentient voice in the service two years afterwards, when it was known that the Admiralty of the day no longer took any interest in them. He mentioned this in order that when they heard such flourishing accounts of Sir William Symonds' ships, and the Penelopes, they might believe as little of it as possible, unless they heard the contrary side. The fastest and finest vessel he had ever seen, was the Water-Witch, built by Mr. White, which was purchased into the service eight or nine years ago. It remained five years on the coast of Africa, and last year the Admiralty sent down to Portsmouth Dockyard, to obtain an estimate of the expense that would be necessary to put her into a complete state of service. The surveyors surveyed her, and reported that it would cost about 6,400l., he believed that was the sum, but the right hon. Gentleman would correct him if he misstated it—and that she was not a good sailer. It was supposed the Admiralty would order her to be broken up, but Mr. White, of Cowes, when he heard of the affair, sent up word to say, that he would take the contract into his hands, and complete her for exactly one-half of the estimate of the dockyard. Why did he mention this, except in order to prove that every report from the dock-yard of ships not built by themselves, or built in a merchant's yard, was to be received with extreme suspicion, if it was not utterly worthless? There they were all combined, and many of them hated one another like poison. Many of these builders in the dock-yards to his knowledge, did so, and all joined to prevent any other person building ships for Her Majesty's service. Every man who commanded a yacht knew that there were men in London, Liverpool, Bristol, or the Isle of Wight, who were as much superior to Sir W. Symonds, as that naval architect was to a common shipwright. He had heard every Admiralty in turn attempt to humbug the House, because there used to be nobody to find them out, but, thank God, since the peace it was not so easy to do that, on account of so many Gentlemen having yachts of their own, who had made themselves masters of the subject; so that the House could no longer be bamboozled year after year as they had been formerly. If, then, those sneaking fellows were not misleading them, the good sense of the House would rise up in judgment against the Admiralty Board. The question was, whether it was best to employ active men, who had been always at sea, and never had been laid on the shelf, or some valuable old Officers, who had been from a quarter to half a century on shore, who knew nothing about a ship, and of whom the only good that could be hoped, was, that they might have a good right-hand-man as a Lieutenant or Master, that they would invariably hold their tongues on all occasions, and that they would give very good dinners to the Lieutenants and Midshipmen, when they entertained them.

Sir G. Cockburn

hoped, when the hon. and gallant Officer did him the honour to quote him, he might be at least quoted fairly and truly, for he would venture to say, that he never had used such an expression to the hon. and gallant Officer, or to any one else, that he was too young to give an opinion. What he did say was, that the gallant Officer had made use of an expression regarding an old and gallant Officer which he thought not very becoming. He apologised for his own age, and said that he hoped, after what had passed, the House would not refuse to hear an old Officer. With respect to the charge which the gallant Officer had thought proper to bring against the Admiralty, he could only say, that what he had stated against them generally was not more true than what he stated against him individually. He defied any Board to take more pains than they had done since they came to the Admiralty in endeavouring to improve the building of the Navy. He considered Sir W. Symonds to be a man to whom the service was very much indebted, and who had made great improve- ments in the build of ships, but at the same time he was free to say that he did not think his ships were perfect, and he knew that when persons took up a system, they sometimes became too exclusively attached to it; so it was felt right that some check should be kept on that valuable Officer. They had directed all the master-shipwrights to be called together at Woolwich, to endeavour to find out the best mode of building ships for strength and efficiency. He believed they had, between them, got at what appeared to him to be perfection, with regard to the principle of the construction of sterns. Three of the most talented native artists, who had gained the highest prizes in mathematics, and written the best essays, were sent back to Chatham to meet and examine the building of the ships, and they had given in a very elaborate statement, giving reasons why every ship had faults, and why perfection had not been yet obtained. They were now employing those persons to build a ship themselves, in order to show whether they could not produce the best ship in the world. The Admiralty, therefore, were not to be told that they were taking no pains to improve the Naval Architecture of the country. Great advances had been already made. The Vernon frigate, it should be remembered, was nearly of the same tonnage as the Victory, which had been the flag ship in some of our largest naval battles. All classes had advanced; he remembered that even the twenty-eight gun frigates were thought most desirable ships; when he went to sea first, they were looked upon to be almost perfection. There was the little frigate Dido, with twenty-six nine-pounders, which went alongside of one of the largest French frigates and captured her, under the command of Sir H. Blackwood. The gallant commodore had said that the French fleet on the Syrian coast got under weigh in a manner so brilliant, that the British could not imitate them. But, per contra, he (Sir G. Cockburn) had been told by the captain of the Asia, that being under the lee of the land with three or four French ships in a heavy gale of wind, the British ship was the only one which stood it out. He believed that if we had a French squadron off Brest in a gale of wind, and an English squadron after it, the gallant Captain would soon find there were some officers in the Navy who knew their busi- ness. It was very easy to get up in the House and say that our officers were unskilled or unpractised, but he would undertake to say, that when occasion arose it would be found that there was as much zeal and ardency as during the war, though there could not well be the same extent of practice, when three-fourths of the officers were on half-pay. He entertained not the smallest doubt that they would manifest as great superiority over other nations as they had ever done.

Rear-Admiral Dundas

said, it ought not to go abroad that there was anything like failing in our officers or our men. On the contrary he would say, that having known the Navy forty-years, he had never known it in a better condition. The men were better educated, better fed, with much less punishment than formerly, and better exercised at the guns. He said, therefore, there were just as good fish in the sea as ever came out of it.

Captain Pechell,

after expressing his regret that the French fleet should have been praised at the expense of the English Navy, said he was glad to hear the hon. and gallant Officer opposite, Captain Rous, state his opinions in the independent manner he had. It was a good example to naval Officers on the other side of the House. The hon. and gallant Member then proceeded to praise the qualities of the Waterwitch, and to express his approval of the vessels now building. He had not understood the hon. and gallant Officer opposite to impugn those, but to allude to a previous date, when vessels were built which could neither be put alongside an enemy, nor were able to run away from one. The hon. and gallant Admiral appeared offended at the report of the Shipwreck Committee, but he assured him that it was of no use for any individual Lord of the Admiralty to stand up in defence of such ships as were there alluded to, for the country at large disapproved of them. There was a disgraceful instance of a ship of war being in such a condition that she was actually taken by a pirate, and the crew murdered. With respect to the experiments now making with the Archimedean screw in the Rattler, he felt it his duty to say that the experiments were now making by Mr. Brunel over Mr. Smith, who was the inventor of the screw, and the consequence was, that the vessel sailed nearly a knot less every time she was tried. While the vessel made ten knots under Mr. Smith, she now only made eight. This was not fair, and was calculated to be highly injurious to Mr. Smith, who would have the discredit of the failure, and he thought that this explanation was due to that Gentleman. The Members of the Board of Admiralty received their half-pay, while the other officers holding offices of emolument under the Crown, or on foreign service, or in holy orders, had not the like privilege. He had no objection to the hon. and gallant Admiral receiving his half-pay, but let the principle be fairly carried out, There was the Lieutenant Governor of Greenwich Hospital, Sir James Gordon, a gallant Officer who had served his country, and was now going about with a wooden leg; he could not receive his half-pay, and why should he not be put on the same footing in that respect as the Governor of Chelsea Hospital? Why did not the Government apply to the Attorney and Solicitor General for their opinion, whether Sir J. Gordon could or could not legally receive his half-pay and if there was a doubt, let the gallant officer have the benefit of it. He must complain too of the manner in which the Income Tax pressed upon officers and their families. These were points which he trusted the hon. and gallant Admiral would give his attention to: they were subjects which lay Lords might not understand, but officers expected relief from those who had lived with them and sailed with them; and now there was a strong Government he hoped the hon. and gallant Admiral would attend to the suggestions he had thrown out.

Captain Rous

explained that he had never entertained the idea that the French navy was superior to ours in anything. He had quoted a speech formerly made by the hon. and gallant Commodore. He (Captain Rous) had the most perfect confidence in the seamen and marines of the country; and if war were unfortunately to arise, he would stake his existence upon them.

Sir C. Napier

congratulated the House and the country that naval Officers on both sides of the House, laying aside party considerations, had boldly spoken out as the hon. and gallant Officer opposite had done upon matters connected with the welfare of the navy. When he (Sir C. Napier) had brought the state of the Navy under the consideration of the House, and was supported by the noble Lord, the Member for Staffordshire, the right hon. Baronet opposite said it was a bad thing when naval Officers combined together against the Government on naval matters; but he thought there was nothing more advantageous to the country than for naval Officers to combine together to reform and correct the deeds of every Admiralty, whether Whig or Tory. The Penelope had been represented as a splendid vessel, perfectly dry, and never shipping a drop of water, while it was notorious to all but the captain of that vessel, that so far from being dry, she was almost always under water, and, like a large porpoise, only came up once an hour to breathe. She was only fit to drown the men. The hon. and gallant Officer entered into a technical comparison of the qualities of the Penelope, the Albion, the Rodney, the Powerful, and the cost of the build of each; contending that it was useless to build ships at a vast expellee carrying only six guns more than those built at a far less expense. He recommended that vessels of that class now on the stocks should be taken to pieces and begun afresh. In respect to what he had formerly said as to the evolutions of the French fleet, he repeated that their evolutions were performed in a masterly manner in fine weather. But the French ships were manned by young men. As men grew older, they grew more idle, more disposed to rest quietly at anchorage, than to exercise their ships; but if we pursued the same system as the French, and got young officers to command the ships, and young Admirals to command the fleets, we should exhibit the same activity, and there was not the least doubt we should beat them out and out. But that was not our system. At Malta, for example, there was a ship bearing an Admiral's flag who was seventy-five years of age. When it was considered that half of our young officers were brought up in the large ships lying at Portsmouth and Plymouth, could the House be surprised that the French, or the Americans or any other nations beat us? He did not blame the officers, but he blamed the Admiralty, and the constitution of the Admiralty, and he blamed the right hon. Baronet for not assenting to the very moderate proposition he (Sir Charles Napier) had made, of appropriating 15,000l. to enable old officers to retire. If they desired to compete with their rivals, they must do as the French did, and have young men of forty to command their fleets. Before he consented to the vote, he wished to know if the hon. and gallant Admiral had changed the opinions he had formerly expressed on the constitution of the Board of Admiralty?

Sir George Cockburn

would not say anything about the constitution of the Board of Admiralty, which was not of his creation. While he was at the Board he would do his duty to the best of his ability, and when he was no longer of any use, he would retire. When, however, the gallant Officer said that no one, except the Captain of the Penelope, would say that she was a dry vessel, and when she was called a mere porpoise, he must refer to a letter from Sir Charles Rowley, who was at sea with her, having her under his command; and he declared that during the time she was with the squadron, there were generally heavy seas, and when she was to leeward of him he had ordered her to steam to windward against a heavy sea, and that she appeared to do so without straining, and was perfectly dry.

Admiral Dundas

had received a private letter from Captain Jones, saying that she had completely succeeded, and was the best sea boat he ever knew.

Vote agreed to.

On the Vote of 495,656l. to defray the charge for Military Pensions and Allowances connected with the Navy,

Mr. W. Williams

urged that this Vote should be postponed until further explanation were given in the printed Estimates respecting it. All that he required was, that a similar statement to that affixed to the Army Estimates should be printed with the Navy Estimates.

Mr. S. Herbert

explained that formerly the Vote included items which were not now contained in it; if they had been, there would have been a considerable reduction this year, instead of an increase.

Sir C. Napier

wished to draw the attention of the Admiralty to a subject he had alluded to before, namely, that if an officer lost a limb, or received a wound nearly equal to the loss of a limb, he did not get anything. He (Sir C. Napier) had had a shot wound himself in one of his legs. If he were to receive a wound in the same leg again, two inches deeper, he would be entitled to a pension; but if it were to be in the other leg, and not so deep as to make a wound equal to the loss of a limb, he should get no pension at all. He thought in future it would be fair and just, where an officer received a wound, that he should be examined by a medical man, who should report to the Admiralty what pension he ought to have.

Sir G. Cockburn

said, that if the wound were not equal to the loss of a limb, the officer received a gratuity; but if it was equal to the loss of a limb, he got a pension.

Vote agreed to.

Several other Votes were agreed to. The House resumed. Committee to sit again.

House adjourned at one o'clock.