COMMODORE KEPPEL AND THE LOSS OF THE RALEIGH (Hansard, 24 July 1857)

§ LORD CLARENCE PAGET
said, he would beg to ask the right hon. Baronet he First Lord of the Admiralty whether there is any foundation for the report that Commodore Keppel has been recalled from his command in the China Seas?

§ SIR GEORGE GREY
said, his right hon. Friend (Sir C. Wood) having spoken once, was precluded by the rules of the House from speaking again on the Motion before it.

§ LORD CLARENCE PAGET
said, he had understood within the last half-hour that it was not the intention of the First Lord of the Admiralty to recall Commodore Keppel from the China Seas, provided he were acquitted by a court-martial. Perhaps his right hon. Friend would do him the favour of nodding his head if that view were correct—as in that case he should not feel it necessary to trouble the House with any statement. As the right hon. Gentleman had made no response, he was afraid he must assume that it was not his intention to allow Commodore Keppel to remain at his post in the China Seas, supposing him to be acquitted by the court-martial appointed to try him. If that was the case, he (Lord C. Paget) thought that a great injustice would be done to one of the most meritorious officers in the navy. This was at the present instant a question of grave public importance. They had sent out to the Chinese seas one of their very best officers, they were about to engage in hostilities with an enemy not altogether despicable, and yet they were going to deprive the navy of the service of one the most valuable and courageous men they had. Under these circumstances he felt it his duty to state in a few words the acts which attended the loss of the Raleigh. It was unnecessary for him to say anything of the distinguished services of his gallant Friend, for he saw many in the House who, from having served with him in the Crimea, could better explain the gallantry of his behaviour on the heights of Sebastopol and in command of a battery there. He might, however, say, that he was a man eminently calculated to perform the services which would be required of him in the Chinese Seas, and the First Lord himself knew that there was upon that station no officer better qualified to act as second in command to Sir Michael Seymour. Having been appointed to that post, Commodore 369 Keppel lost no time in proceeding to the scene of his duties; but, unfortunately, just as he came in sight of the land where his services were required, he ran his ship upon a hidden rock not mentioned in any chart and wholly unknown. The ship was thus lost, but without any blame, as he thought, attaching to the Commodore. The Commander in Chief on the station, feeling this, and wishing to retain the services of so good an officer, expressed a hope that he might be permitted to give him a commission in another ship in case he should be acquitted, as it was morally certain he would be, by his brother officers, and, since the catastrophe, had employed him on active service in the boats against the Chinese. He (Lord C. Paget) quite agreed in the recommendation of the Commander in Chief, and the House would believe him that he would not for a moment say a word in his defence if he conceived him guilty. He was convinced, however, that he would be most honourably acquitted. It must be remembered that the gallant Commodore had with him the newest Admiralty charts, and no trace of the rock in question was laid down in them; the gallant Commodore was surely justified in placing implicit reliance upon them. The fact was, that if the gallant Commodore were recalled, it would be in consequence of an antiquated rule of the service which decreed that a Commodore of the second class was incapacitated from hoisting his flag in any other ship than the one to which he had been commissioned, so that if by the chapter of accidents he had the misfortune to lose his ship, whether in action or any other way, from that moment his command over the other vessels of the squadron ceased. It was in consequence of that antiquated law of the Medes and Persians that this gallant officer was to be recalled, degraded, and dishonoured, without having in the slightest degree merited blame. He would refer them to a parallel case in the sister service. When a brevet came out every officer who was promoted to a higher rank was at once placed on the half-pay list; and if serving abroad he had nothing for it but to pack up his portmanteau and return to England. That was a rule in the army. When his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Greenwich (Sir W. Codrington) arrived at Varna with the expeditionary force sent to the East, he was a major in a battalion of the Guards. A brevet went out; that gallant officer was promoted, and the result of this was 370 that he was at once placed upon the half-pay list. The late lamented Lord Raglan, however, knowing the value of his services, and disregarding in such a case old rules and regulations, at once appointed him to a command; and the country owed it to this circumstance that it had the services of the gallant officer at the Alma and at Inkerman. The much-abused Horse Guards confirmed Lord Raglan's appointment. Now, he asked the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, considering his great services, his peculiar applicability for the performance of the duties for which he had been chosen, the fact of the loss of the vessel being an undoubted accident, and the recommendation of Sir M. Seymour, whether—if the gallant Commodore were acquitted, he (Sir C. Wood) would break through the antiquated rule which had been referred to, and allow him to hoist a red pennant or something of that sort—but at all events to take the bit in his mouth and make such an order as would prevent this gallant and meritorious officer being sent 15,000 miles home, when his services would be so valuable to the country at the station at which he was?

§ SIR GEORGE GREY
said, the present was an instance of the inconvenience arising from the practice of raising discussions upon multifarious subjects on the question of adjournment. His right hon. Friend the first Lord of the Admiralty having once spoken upon this question, his lips were sealed. He (Sir G. Grey) would, however, endeavour to reply to the question of the noble Lord. Every one acquainted with Commodore Keppel and the services in which he had been engaged would concur with the noble Lord in the high character which he had given of that officer, and he was not entitled to assume that the Admiralty had any intention to disgrace or discredit him or any other gallant officer who did his duty to his country. The whole conduct of the Admiralty showed that there was not the most distant desire on their part to disparage any gentleman employed in Her Majesty's service. It appeared that Commodore Keppel went out in command of the Raleigh frigate to the East, and had the misfortune to lose his ship. By the invariable rule of the service, and a very proper rule it was, every officer, whatever his previous character might have been, and however high his connections and standing in the profession, was in such a case sub- 371 jected to trial by court-martial before his brother officers, in order that the facts of the case might be investigated, and he would either be acquitted, if he deserved acquittal, or be found guilty and have sentence passed upon him, should it appear that the loss of the ship was occasioned by his misconduct or neglect. His noble Friend sought to anticipate that inquiry. By the last accounts from the East they were informed that the court-martial was about to sit, and if there were no room for blame the proceedings would terminate—as all must hope they would—in Commodore Keppel's acquittal; but while the matter was still sub judice, he must protest against the House of Commons being called on to express an opinion upon the case. Till the decision of that tribunal became known it would be altogether premature to come to any conclusion regarding the case; but, in the meantime, there was not the slightest ground for saying that any injustice was done by the Admiralty to Commodore Keppel.

§ SIR WILLIAM CODRINGTON
said, he thought his noble Friend (Lord C. Paget) was justified in defending in the way he had done an absent brother officer, who was suffering from a temporary misfortune. The gallant officer to whom he referred lost his ship by running against a rock not laid down in any chart; and though no blame could be imputed to him he was, by an obsolete rule, lost to the service on which he had been specially sent. That was the point to which his noble Friend had very properly adverted, and his doing so in no way implied interference with the court-martial. His question had reference only to the orders of the Admiralty which prevented an officer who might have lost his ship even in presence of an enemy from being retained on the foreign service in which he was engaged, and made it necessary that he should be commissioned to some other ship by the Admiralty at home. It was on that ground that his noble Friend thought injustice might be done, not only to Commodore Keppel but to the Commander in Chief on the spot. He believed the Commander in Chief had made use of Commodore Keppel's services in boats, but he was precluded from employing him in the way he desired. He (General Codrington) could bear his testimony to the invaluable services of Commodore Keppel in the batteries before Sebastopol, where he commanded the naval brigade. His coolness, his daring, and his 372 assiduity excited universal admiration, and he trusted that the Admiralty would enable the Commander in Chief to retain his services now in that part of the world where they were so much wanted.

§ ADMIRAL WALCOTT
said, he fully concurred in the sentiments so well expressed by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department on this subject. It was the invariable rule of the Naval Service to subject an officer in Commodore Keppel's circumstances to trial by court-martial, and till he was acquitted it was impossible that he could be employed as his noble and gallant Friend proposed. He agreed with the noble Lord in every word that had fallen from him with reference to the high qualities of Commodore Keppel; but he was proud to say that there were many officers of the highest merit on the Chinese station who would not disappoint the expectations of the country in the absence of Commodore Keppel. He should, at the same time, be most glad to hear, and of this he happily entertained no misgiving, that he was acquitted by a court-martial for the loss of the Raleigh, and that the Commander in Chief was enabled to retain his services on the station. When on his feet he wished to correct a misstatement he had made to the House the other evening, when he said that the Medusa frigate had made an unprecedented voyage to the East Indies in eighty-four days. He now found that a ship belonging to Mr. Green had, in four consecutive voyages, made the passage in seventy-seven days, and he was happy to find that naval architecture was so much improved as to make such passages possible.

§ SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONE
said, that with reference to Commodore Keppel and the wreck of the Raleigh, he (Sir J. Elphinstone) had received a letter in which he was informed that the officer who had surveyed the place on the order of Sir John Bowring, had stated in his report that the sunken rock in question was two miles and six furlongs from the land, and that, not being laid down in any chart, it was impossible for the gallant Commodore to guard agaiust the danger. He thought that no obsolete rule should be allowed to stand in the way of the employment of the gallant officer.