§ LORD J. RUSSELLthought it would be a disappointment to the House if the financial statement were not made on Friday; and if the Navy Estimates were not taken that night, it would be impossible that it could be then made.
CAPTAIN HARRIS, with great deference to the right hon. Gentleman, must say that it was a very unusual course to go at once from one Committee to another. He would only say that by this proceeding he was debarred from making a statement that he wished to make on the question "that Mr. Speaker do leave the chair," with reference to manning the Navy.
SIR F. T. BARINGthen proceeded: The Vote which he had to propose to the Committee was a vote for fixing the number of men at 39,000, and in doing so, he would, as was usual on such occasions, bring before them a statement of the general expenditure of the Naval Estimates. The first vote to which he had to allude was one that he should bring forward with the more regret if he did not entertain the hope that it would be the last vote of that character that the House of Commons would be called upon to make— 704 he meant the vote for making up the deficit of a former year. The vote for the deficiency of 1848–1849 amounted to the sum of 211,000l., by which in that year the expenditure had gone beyond the estimates. This the House was aware had occurred on many previous occasions; and it would, perhaps, be recollected, that the late Secretary of the Admiralty stated last year that the deficit was likely to be from 250,000l. to 260,000l. It had not, however, reached that sum. He had always been of opinion, on whatever side of the House he happened to be, that the mode of making up by the votes of a subsequent year the deficiency of former estimates was a most unfortunate course to pursue; but it was a course not uncommon of late years. One of the causes from which this arose was the insufficiency of the sum voted for the number of seamen borne. All who were on the Committee of 1848 were aware that this unfortunate practice of exceeding the votes came on very gradually, the evil being very small at first, but becoming serious and important in the end. The sum voted for the number had been constantly below what was really employed; besides which, it was well known that the vote for wages was at best but a very loose statement—merely an approximate estimate—and that the mode in which the estimate was framed in later years was incorrect. It was also to be noted, that in 1848, when the estimates were proposed, the House having received them was so adverse to their passing that lower estimates were brought forward: the Government were anxious, as far as possible, to come within the lower estimates thus made; but it was found extremely difficult in so short a time as was allowed them to reduce the expenditure to the extent required, and the result had been that the expenditure, though below the original estimate, was not below the estimate subsequently given in. These things would in some measure account for the deficiency now to be made up; but he was happy to say, that this course would not be pursued on a future occasion. He was able to state, that though there had been expenses they were not prepared for, yet there would be a surplus for the year 1849–50, such as would enable them to meet the deficiencies of 1848–1849. He would now proceed with the general statement of the estimates. He gave for the effective service for 1850–51 a sum of 4,325,086l.; for the non-effective service, 1,388,637l.; 705 add to this, for the conveyance of troops, 135,000l., and for the packet service 764,236l., and they had a total of 6,613,659l As compared with 1849–50, the reduction in the effective service was 406,972l.; non-effective service, 5,533l.; conveyance of troops, 11,500l.—in all, 424,005l.: deducting 16,000l. for increase of the packet service it amounted to 408,000l. But that was not quite a fair mode of ascertaining what had been effected within the last year for this purpose; it would be necessary to look at the expenditure of 1848–49. Comparing then the expenditure of 1848–49 with the estimates of 1850–51, the figures stood thus;—Expenditure for 1848–49, 7,947,376l.; estimates for 1850–51, 6,613,659l.; being a difference of 1,333,717l. There was no intention on their part to over-estimate the reduction; but it was a course they were anxious to pursue, though, perhaps, they were not prepared to go to the extent of his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose. There was scarcely a single vote in which there had not been some reduction made in the course of the present year. He begged to be understood, that in speaking of the Admiralty of the present day, he was not making an invidious comparison between the present system and the system of former years. He was not going to claim merit for themselves for making reductions, or laying the fault of the expenditure on those who went before them. On the contrary, he felt bound to say that the expenditure in former years had enabled them to make reductions at present. And in many cases he believed that the persons who had increased the expenditure in former years, would, if they had continued in office, have made reductions in the expenditure. He regretted that his noble Friend Lord Auckland had not lived to see the reductions effected which he had contemplated. He had laid the foundation of a great number of those that had taken place, though it happened that he (Sir F. Baring) was the person to state them to the House. In going through the estimates he would state the recommendations of the Committee of 1848, which had been carried into effect, because great and important advantages had been derived from the labours of the Committee of 1848, and because it would show that their recommendations had not been neglected. It must, however, be remembered that but for the expenditure that had formerly been made in several instances, it 706 would have been impossible now to have made the reductions that had been effected. Taking the three votes together—namely, for men, wages, and victualling, the reduction in consequence of the proposed reduction of 1,000 men would be about 50,000l. The Committee recommended that an alteration should be made in the mode of estimating the wages of the men which had been for many years adopted. That which was considered a great source of incorrectness had been altered, and the estimate for the last year was made in the mode introduced by his right hon. Friend the Member for Ripon when he was First Lord of the Admiralty, to which it was found convenient again to have recourse. The next and most important point was, that the number of men borne on the books should be kept within the number voted by Parliament. To do that without any deviation was almost impossible. The most attentive Board of Admiralty could not always bring the number of men within the vote. But, so far as the last year was concerned, they had been able to carry out that object; and, with the exception of the first month, it would be found, that the monthly returns of the number of men had been below the number voted. It was for the purpose of attaining that end that the Committee recommended that monthly returns should be stated in the estimate, which it would be found had been accordingly adopted. It was proposed to make a reduction of 1,000 men in the marine force. But in speaking of the number of men to be employed, he must be permitted to observe, that that was a subject in regard to which, to a certain degree, confidence must be placed in the Government. It was not easy to give all the particular reasons why the Government should fix upon any certain number of men. That must rest a great deal upon circumstances which it might not be convenient to state. But he could say, that on the 1st of April, 1848, the number of men actually borne on the books was 46,000, whereas the number voted for the present year was 39,000 men; but though 46,000 men were borne on the books in 1848, yet 43,000 men only were voted that year. There had been, therefore, a much larger reduction than would appear in the votes. Under present circumstances, the Government had carried the reduction as far as they could consistently with the efficiency of the service. The Committee might wish to learn the 707 distribution of the men. There were in the East Indies, China, and New Zealand, 2,748; Cape of Good Hope, 793; Africa, 2,452; South Eastern America, 993; Pacific, 2,618; North America and West Indies, 1,817; Mediterranean, 7,959; Lisbon, 3,096; home ports—Ireland and Scotland—5,130; packet service, 583; surveying service, 852; troop-ships, particular service yachts, 762; ordered home, or paying off, 1,310; and fitting out, 1,651. Intimately connected with the distribution of the men was the number of ships in commission. From the 1st of January, 1850, the total ships of the line in commission was 13; advanced and ordinary, 58; building, 15, of which three were ready to be launched. There were frigates in commission, 9; advanced and in ordinary, 58; building, 8; and three of which were ready to be launched. Vessels of a lower grade than frigates in commission, 92; advanced and ordinary, 79; building, 4; of which there were ready to be launched, 1. Of steam vessels there were in commission, 88; advanced and in ordinary, 68; building, 11, and of which there was I ready to be launched. So that there were 202 ships in commission; 263 advanced and in ordinary, and 38 building; and 6 of these ships were ready to be launched. Before quitting this part of the subject, he would state that it was the intention of the Government to reduce the number of the officers in the marine corps in proportion to the number of men that were reduced. A certain number of captains would therefore retire. It had been thought advisable to select for that purpose those officers who were at the head of the list, and to allow them to retire on full pay, rather than take the young captains and place them on half-pay, and to be recalled afterwards on service. This would add to the efficiency of the corps, and would be felt as a fair portion of favour to the marines. With regard to the victualling department, there would not only be a reduction by reason of the number of men being reduced, but also in consequence of the cheapness of provisions enabling the Admiralty to enter into more favourable contracts. There was one subject of deep interest to the whole service, but which he was not yet prepared to bring before the Committee—he meant the question of grog. It had occupied the attention of the Admiralty for some time; and the question had been laid before a committee of naval officers; and he hoped 708 before long to lay the result of their labours before the House, and to be prepared with some proposal on the subject. The next vote was that for the Admiralty Office, in which also there was a reduction. The Committee had recommended that the number of those holding office in that department should be fixed by Order in Council, and that no excess of salary should be taken without the sanction of the Treasury. This plan had been adopted in effect, though not exactly in words. The Admiralty had gone back to the old system of having the establishment settled by Order in Council. The Committee had observed that a large quantity of extra work was done by the clerks of the office, and they recommended that the system should cease. That recommendation would be acted upon; at the same time, it must he observed that when so many returns were required to be made to Parliament, it was not possible to get them ready without extra work. He could, however, state, that during the last year ten clerks had been reduced at the Admiralty, at Whitehall, and at Somerset House. Another arrangement had been made, which was much in accordance with the opinion of the Committee, and by which the whole steam department was placed under the control of the Surveyor of the the Navy. His early attention had been turned to this point, and an opportunity having offered of placing the person who had hitherto superintended the steam department of the Navy in another situation, he had placed the whole of that department, together with the building department, under the authority of the Surveyor of the Navy. He was not quite sure that his gallant friend Sir Baldwin Walker would be able to perform all the duties connected with that department without further assistance; still, as his gallant friend was so confident that he would be able to do so, he (Sir F. Baring) had bowed to his opinion, and had entirely abolished the controllership of the steam department. In the surveying and scientific department, the vote was in conformity with the recommendation of the Committee. He now came to the dockyard establishments. The salaries to officers, and wages to workmen, of the dockyards, both at home and abroad, he should deal with under one head. Upon the estimate for that head of the present year, as compared with that of last year, there was a reduction of 81,000l; and, as compared with the esti- 709 mates of 1848–9,130,000l. The whole of the yards at home had been examined, and the expenditure cheeked, by the Lords of the Admiralty, with the assiatance of Sir Baldwin Walker, and by those means a considerable reduction had been effected. Abroad, the admirals on the stations had been required, either themselves to go into the different items of expenditure, or to appoint a committee of officers for the purpose; and in that way each yard abroad had been examined and reported; and the result had been some small reduction. He would state the number of workmen employed in the dockyards on the 1st of. April, 1848–9, as compared with the number for the 1st of April, 1849–50. The reduction began on the 1st of January, 1848, when there were on the establishment 9,290. On the 1st of April the number had increased to 9,519; on the 1st of April, 1849, it was 9,630; and on the 1st of April, 1850, it would be 9,621. In addition to that number there was an immense number of hired workmen not on the establishment. On the 1st of January, 1848, the total number of those on the establishment and those who were not was 12,218, and on the 1st of April, 1848, 11,430; on the 1st of April, 1849, 10,142, and on the 1st of April, 1850, the number estimated was 9,621; and there were also some temporarily employed as spinners for particular dockyards; but that would terminate when that particular work was over. The number so employed was 420, making for the 1st of April, 1850, 10,041, being a reduction of 2,177, as compared with the number on the 1st of January, 1848. Again, on the 1st of April, 1849, the number of men employed in the factories at Woolwich and Portsmouth was 1,856. The number proposed to be taken this year was 1,155, being a reduction of 701. He did not mean to say that in future years there might not be some further reduction under the same head; but for the present he considered that 2,000 workmen being reduced since the 1st of January, 1848, and 700 in the factories since the 1st of April, 1849, was as far as he could go with a due regard to the efficiency of the service. The recommendation, indeed, of the Committee had been, that these establishments should be fixed by an Order in Council. The Committee had recommended the reduction of the factory at Holyhead. Since the estimates had been framed, the Government had been enabled to enter into a contract for the packet ser- 710 vice between Kingstown and Holyhead upon reasonable terms, part of which was, that the parties should hire the Government factories at Holyhead; and consequently, so far as the Government was concerned, there was no danger that the factory there should be continued. Another recommendation proposed by the Committee, and strongly urged by them, was one the justice of which, he fully admitted, was incontestable. They recommended that in the selection of officers for superintendents of yards, the Government should not think it necessary to confine themselves to the older officers of the service, but should select those who were most fitted for the duties. He was well aware that in adopting that recommendation he had disappointed the expectations of many gallant officers; but he had felt it his duty to carry that recommendation into effect, knowing that there was nothing upon which the efficiency of the department and the expenditure so much depended as on the eye of the superintendent of the yards, without which all regulations would be useless. He now came to that which was one of the most important votes—the Store vote. The Committee had made a recommendation upon an extremely difficult part of that subject—the supply of oak. The supply had been practically a monopoly in the hands of a certain party. That party was dead, and for the present year there had been a contract with a new party. The reduction in this vote had been very considerable. The vote for this year was 878,599/., being a reduction, as compared with that of last year, of 290,270l., and as compared with the expenditure of 1848 and 1849, of 556,072l. The principle upon which the Government proposed to act, was to take the principal stores as they stood in 1849, and, calculating on the average expenditure which would be expended in the course of the next year, to take the estimate for that which would replace the amount actually expended. Therefore, although there was a great reduction, they were not going to work on the old stores, but proposed to keep the stores in a wholesome state, and leave them as they found them last year. In the present state of steam machinery, it was advisable not to keep largo stores of steam-engines. Improvements were always going on, and he thought it better now not to expend large sums in such stores. With respect to new works, as compared with last year, there was a considerable reduction. The estimate for 1848–9 was 711 626,000l. For the present year it was 324,000l., being a reduction of 300,000l., in consequence of the works which had been carried on at Portsmouth, and those which had been commenced at other places by his lamented predecessor having been completed. At that late hour it would not be necessary for him to go at any length into the charges for the miscellaneous services connected with the Navy; but he might say, generally, that in those portions of the estimates the recommendations of the Committee had been in great part adopted. As to the non-effective votes, the Committee had made two recommendations, which the Board of Admiralty were enabled to carry out: one of these was, that one lieutenant should be promoted for every three vacancies; the other was, the limitation of the number of cadets to 100. At present the number was 96. The exact number of the cadets should appear in the estimates in a future year. He had only further to add, that no very considerable reduction appeared to have taken place in the non-effective vote. But the reason was, that we had fewer ships in commission. The half-pay increased as the full pay diminished, and when we reduced a large number of workmen, the pensions to which some of them were entitled diminished the apparent saving. The apparent result was, that there was not so great a reduction in the non-effective as in the effective departments; but looking at the subject as it ought to be regarded, supposing the whole Navy to be now on half-pay, then the result would be, that our reductions in the non-effective branch would appear as they really were—greater than any which had taken place of late years. A number of the miscellaneous recommendations of the Committee had, he might add, been carried out. The Committee recommended entering, as far as possible, into contracts for packet service; and since the estimates were prepared, contracts had been entered into respecting the Holyhead and Kingstown packets, and those contracts were in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee. Other lines were under consideration, such as that between Hong Kong and Australia, as well as steam communication with Brazil. This, however, would not call for any very large sum of money, and he could assure the House that every effort had been made to reduce expenditure to the lowest point that was at all consistent with efficiency.
§
Motion made, and Question proposed—
712
That 39,000 men be employed for the Sea Service for thirteen lunar months, including 11,000 Royal Marines and 2,000 Boys.
§ MR. HUMEsaid, that he had remained, late as the hour was, to record his opposition to so extravagant a vote. Ministers had talked of following out the recommendations of the Committee; but had they, as the Committee recommended, reduced the 150 admirals to 100, though they had contrived to reduce the poor men in the dockyards? It appeared to him that there was no reason whatever for a fleet so large—a fleet in the Mediterranean doing mischief—it was scattering money which the country could not very well spare. Looking at the average number of men voted during the last six years, he found it to be 31,459; and he should now move as an Amendment, that that be the number for the present year.
§
Afterwards Motion made, and Question put—
That 31,400 men be employed for the Sea Service for thirteen lunar months, including 11,000 Royal Marines, and 2,000 Boys.
§ SIR G. PECHELLexpressed the great satisfaction with which he had listened to the statement of the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Admiralty; but there was a point on which he wished to make an observation. He understood that the allowance of grog to the sailors was now a matter under consideration, and he must be allowed to say that it was a very ticklish affair; and, in abolishing any portion of the allowance of grog, they ought to proceed most cautiously.
§ COLONEL SIBTHORPsaid, that although the naval service ought to be maintained, yet he did think that in the Admiralty department a saving might be effected.
§ CAPTAIN PELHAMregretted that a vote on so important a subject should be taken at so late an hour, and thought the proper course would be for the Chairman to report progress. The country would not be satisfied with the economy of the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty, and there would be further reductions before long, which could be carried into effect without in any way injuring the efficiency of that service which was the real strength of this country. On general grounds he would vote with the hon. Member for Montrose, if he persisted in dividing the House.
§ MR. BANKESagreed entirely with the hon. Member for Montrose, that a portion 713 of our naval force was employed in a very questionable manner at this moment; and when such was the case, year after year, it could not be matter of surprise to find the naval estimates were exceeded. He should be glad to be informed by the noble Lord opposite in what light they were to consider the Grecian vessels captured by our fleet, which, up to the present moment, according to a statement in that day's paper, amounted to 160 sail. Were they to be considered as prizes taken in war or not? We had subjected ourselves to the mediation of another Power, and if they decreed we were wrong, we should have to pay damages, which would cause another excess of naval estimates.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONI rather think the hon. Gentleman the Member for Dorsetshire is misinformed with respect to the number of vessels taken. At least, by the last accounts we have received, they were only between 40 and 50. The condition in which those vessels are is that of pledges taken and held in deposit for the satisfaction of the claims of this country. If those claims are satisfied, then those vessels are released. If it should be necessary to carry reprisals out to the full extent under the law of nations, they will be condemned and sold, and the proceeds will be applied to the purpose of satisfying those demands by means of the process well known to the law of nations where a commission issues under an Order in Council. With regard to the apprehension which the hon. Gentleman seems to entertain, I beg to inform him that we have not accepted the arbitration of any Power. We have accepted the good offices of France with the view of obtaining an amicable settlement of our claims. There is no subjection on the part of our Government to any arbitration.
CAPTAIN HARRISsuggested, that as the Army had three field-marshals, the Navy ought to have two admirals of the fleet, and advocated the claims of Sir G. Cockburn to the distinction.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 19; Noes 117: Majority 98.
| List of the AYES. | |
| Adair, H. E. | Kershaw, J. |
| Bouverie, hon. E P. | Morris, D. |
| Brotherton, J. | Pechell, Sir G. B. |
| Cobden, R. | Pelham, hon. D. A. |
| Fordyce, A. D. | Pilkington, J. |
| Frewen, C. H. | Salwey, Col. |
| Greene, J. | Thompson, Col. |
| Hastie, A. | Thornely, T. |
| Walmsley, Sir J. | TELLERS. |
| Wawn, J. T. | Hume, J. |
| Williams, J. | Gibson, T. M. |
| List of the NOES. | |
| Acland, Sir T. D. | Hobhouse, T. B. |
| Anson, hon. Col. | Hodges, T. L. |
| Armstrong, R. B. | Hodgson, W. N. |
| Baines, rt. hon. M. T. | Howard, hon. C. W. G. |
| Bankes, G. | Howard, P. H. |
| Baring, rt. hon. Sir F. T. | Jermyn, Earl |
| Baring, T. | Jervis, Sir J. |
| Bellew, R. M. | Jones, Capt. |
| Berkeley, Adm. | Kildare, Marq. of |
| Blackall, S. W. | Lennox, Lord A. G. |
| Blair, S. | Lewis, G. C. |
| Boldero, H. G. | Lewisham, Visct. |
| Bowles, Adm. | Lindsay, hon. Col. |
| Cardwell, E. | Mackinnon, W. A. |
| Carew, W. H. P. | Mahon, The O'Gorman |
| Carter, J. B. | Mandeville, Visct. |
| Cavendish, hon. C. C. | Maule, rt. hon. F. |
| Cavendish, hon. G. H. | Moffatt, G. |
| Cavendish, W. G. | Mulgrave, Earl of |
| Childers, J. W. | Naas, Lord |
| Christy, S. | Norreys, Sir D. J. |
| Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G. | Owen, Sir J. |
| Clive, hon. R. H. | Paget, Lord A. |
| Cocks, T. S. | Paget, Lord C. |
| Corry, rt. hon. H. L. | Palmerston, Visct. |
| Cowper, hon. W. F. | Parker, J. |
| Crowder, R. B. | Portal, M. |
| Douro, Marq. of | Power, Dr. |
| Duckworth, Sir J. T. B. | Rawdon, Col. |
| Duncuft, J. | Ricardo, O. |
| Dundas, Adm. | Rice, E. R. |
| Dundas, rt. hon. Sir D. | Rich, H. |
| Dunne, Col. | Romilly, Sir J. |
| Ebrington, Visct. | Rushout, Capt. |
| Estcourt, J. B.B. | Russell, Lord J. |
| Evans, W. | Russell, F. C. H. |
| Farrer, J. | Seymer, H. K. |
| Ferguson, Sir R. A. | Sibthorp, Col. |
| Fitzroy, hon. H. | Simeon, J. |
| Fortescue, hon. J. W. | Smollett, A. |
| Freestun, Col. | Somerville, rt. hon. Sir W. |
| Gordon, Adm. | Spooner, R. |
| Goulburn, rt. hon. H. | Stanley, hon. E. H. |
| Grace, O. D. J. | Talbot, J. H. |
| Greene, T. | Tenison, E. K. |
| Grenfell, C. W. | Thicknesse, R. A. |
| Grey, rt. hon. Sir J. | Thompson, Ald. |
| Guernsey, Lord | Townshend, Capt. |
| Gwyn, H. | Turner, G. J. |
| Hallyburton, Lord J. F. | Vesey, hon. T. |
| Harris, hon. Capt. | Wellesley, Lord C. |
| Hatchell, J. | Westhead, J. P. B. |
| Hawes, B. | Williamson, Sir H. |
| Hayter, rt. hon. W. G. | Willoughby, Sir H. |
| Headlam, T. E. | Wilson, J. |
| Henley, J. W. | Wrightson, W. B. |
| Herbert, H. A. | Wyld, J. |
| Herbert, rt. hon. S. | TELLERS. |
| Hildyard, R. C. | Tufnell, H. |
| Hobhouse, rt. hon. Sir J. | Hill, Lord M. |
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ The House resumed; Chairman reported progress.
§ Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.
§ The House adjourned at One o'clock.