THE BOARD OF ORDNANCE. (Hansard, 10 August 1846)

§ MR. HUME

moved the Amendment of which he had given notice, viz., That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Conduct of the Board of Ordnance, in their refusing to inquire into alleged malversation of the Public Stores by officers of that department, and into the cause and manner of dismissal of Daniel Toner, a pensioner, for good service in the Artillery, from Her Majesty's service, without allowing the said Daniel Toner to be present at the court of inquiry, or to be heard in his own defence. He feared it was now too late in the Session to have the inquiry carried out by a Committee of that House; but he should shortly state the facts of the case, and if the heads of the Ordnance department would say that they were prepared to order an inquiry, he would withdraw his Motion. The petition from Daniel Toner, upon which he founded his Motion, was presented to the House on the 24th of June last. The case was first brought under his notice in the month of March, and upon asking what the man Toner complained of, he found that he principally complained of having been dismissed from his employment by a court of inquiry which had never called him before them. He thought this a very great hardship; and he asked Toner for certificates of his character. The most satisfactory references were accordingly produced. The petitioner stated, that in the month of April, 1845, being then employed as a labourer in the storekeeper's department of Her Majesty's Royal Arsenal, at Woolwich, he saw a misapplication of the public stores, which he thought it his duty to report to his superiors; that a court of inquiry was instituted, which affirmed the charges to a certain degree; and that the party implicated was dismissed the service, and made to pay back the sum of 214l. The petitioner further complained that from the moment this took place, he was subjected to a series of annoyances by persons in the Royal Arsenal, who wished to get rid of him, and that at last a charge was preferred against him by a clerk in the storekeeper's department named Read, for refusing to take off his hat to him in the pay office—the petitioner's excuse being, that there was no general order to do it, that they did not do it, and that he did not see why he should be singled out. Mr. Read then complained to the general officer, who reported the case to the Board; and from the hour he received a communication from the Board on the subject, Toner always took off his hat to Mr. Read, 558 and never offended again. But the case did not end here. A court of inquiry was instituted, of which he was sorry to see Lord Bloomfield and Colonel Berney were members; and, contrary to all rules of justice, they never called Toner before them, though he would have been able to prove most satisfactorily that from the hour the order had been issued he had obeyed it. The court of inquiry, in these circumstances, recommended Toner to be discharged, and their recommendation having been sent to London, to the Inspector General of the Ordnance, it was ultimately carried out. So that here was an individual who ought to have been protected—because he was the means of pointing out a case of malversation in the stores—turned out of the service, merely on an alleged trumped-up charge that he would not take off his hat to a certain officer, although, up to that time, no one had been asked to take off his hat to him, nor had any other person been asked since. From information which he (Mr. Hume) had received, he suspected that that department of the service was not in the condition it ought to be, as the following correspondence between Toner and one of the officers of the department would indicate:—

COLONEL PEEL

was sure, after the speech of the hon. Member who had just sat down, the House would do him the justice, as a Member of the late Board of Ordnance, to listen to the answer which he had to give to the charges which had been brought forward. The Motion contained two allegations—first, that the Board of Ordnance had refused an inquiry into an alleged malversation of stores; and second, that they had dismissed Toner from the service. He would take the charges in the order in which they were stated. Now, he denied that the Board of Ordnance had shown any indisposition to inquire into the charges. On the contrary, a committee was appointed, before whom Toner appeared as prosecutor, and cross-examined all the witnesses. He admitted that the proceedings of the committee were most fair. The result was, that Mr. Jones was found to have committed some irregularities, and he was dismissed. Toner, it appeared, had been in the habit for two years of making notes of what occurred in the yard, with a view to subsequent complaints and charges, and on the occasion of this inquiry he was distinctly asked whether he had any other charges to make? His answer, in writing, was, that he had not. The hon. Member, however, complained that Toner was subsequently dismissed under an order of which he had never heard. Now, it appeared that Mr. Read, a civil officer in the dockyard, having had reason to complain of disrespect on the part of the labourers when they came to be paid, issued an order that they should come into his office uncovered. Toner complained of this as a piece of presumption, and he was the only person who did not comply with the order. Mr. Read referred the matter to the Master General, whose answer was, that the order must be obeyed by Toner, as well as by the other men. This minute of the Master General was communicated to the workmen, but Toner still did not observe the order. Lord Bloomfield and Colonel Berney then investigated the case, and ordered Toney to 560 be suspended. On the facts being reported to the Master General, he ordered that Toner should be dismissed. Toner's own statement subsequently was, that he obeyed, but remonstrated with Mr. Read for requiring such homage from the men. The truth of the case was, that Toner, in consequence of his having been useful in leading to the first discoveries, assumed a position in the dockyard which was quite incompatible with the maintenance of discipline, and it became absolutely necessary to make an example of him.