MR. H. B. JOHNSTONEsaid, he some weeks ago asked the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he was aware that at the end of the financial year several shipwrights had been discharged from Her Majesty's dockyards, nearly all of whom had obtained employment in the French dockyards. The noble Lord in reply said he knew nothing about the matter. On that day week there appeared in all the newspapers a report of an application made to one of the Metropolitan magistrates for a passport to France by one of our shipwrights who had been discharged from Portsmouth dockyard. The applicant stated that his object in asking for a passport was to obtain employment in the French dockyards. The magistrate thought 209 it was an extraordinary application, and asked him whether he could not get employment in this country. The applicant said he could not, and that 500 shipwrights who had been discharged from Her Majesty's dockyards were now employed in the French dockyards, that he believed hundreds more of our shipwrights intended to follow them, and that he was anxious to get employment in France. He (Mr. B. Johnstone) did not wish to cast any blame on the Government with respect to this matter, for he knew they were not to blame. His object in bringing this subject before the House and the country was to point out the great activity that at present prevailed in the French dockyards. From information he had received there was at this moment between 1,200 and 1,300 of our skilled artisans employed in the French dockyards. If the calamity of a war should happen between England and France, we might have the pleasure of taking the French ships built by those men; but it was a very grave matter that some of our best shipwrights should be employed in building French ships. Could not some mode be suggested for preventing our shipwrights going to France for employment? If the Admiralty would discharge more gradually the men whom they did not want, so much dissatisfaction and disgust would not be created amongst them, and they would be less disposed to enter into the service of foreign countries. He would conclude by asking the Secretary to the Admiralty, whether it is true, as stated in an application made to one of the Metropolitan magistrates, that upwards of 500 shipwrights, who had been suddenly discharged from Portsmouth dockyard, had gone to Cherbourg, and are now in the employment of the French Government?
§ MR. BERNAL OSBORNEbore testimony to the anxiety which prevailed on this subject. He wished to ask the noble Lord (Lord C. Paget) if he was able to contradict a statement that had been given as the reason for discharging those men from our dockyards. The reason given, as he understood, was that there was not two years' supply of timber in store. He also wished to ask the Secretary for Ireland what course he intended to take with regard to those Irish Bills which had been on the paper for so long a time? There was a Bill for the registration of births, marriages, and deaths, brought in by the Government, and he believed a Bill had been brought in on the same subject by 210 the noble Lord opposite (Lord Naas), which stood for that night also, and there were also two Landlord and Tenant Bills. He thought, therefore, it would be very convenient to hon. Gentlemen connected with Ireland, if the Secretary for Ireland would state what course he intended to take in respect to these Bills.
§ LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, he perfectly remembered the Question which the hon. Member had put to him some weeks ago with regard to the discharge of artificers from Her Majesty's dockyards, and who, it was stated, had gone to Cherbourg to enter the Imperial dockyard there. Now, that statement had caused a good deal of sensation, which was not confined entirely to this side of the water. The result was that our Consul at Cherbourg had written to our Government to state that there was no truth whatever in the report of any English workmen having got employment in the Imperial dockyard at Cherbourg. He stated, moreover, that it was contrary to the regulations that any foreign artificer should work in the French dockyards; he added also—which was a still more conclusive argument against the supposition of English workmen being so employed—that whereas both in private trade and under the system of the Royal dockyards in this country the men were earning about 6s. a day, in France the wages were about 4f. a day. It was not likely, therefore, English workmen, when there was plenty of work to be had all round the country, should go across the water to work for 4f. a day; and if any had gone, they would probably be glad to come back again. He did send, however, to Sir Richard Mayne to inquire whether any number of men had asked at the Police' courts for passports; and he (Sir Richard Mayne) found on making inquiries at the Southward Police-court that only one man, named James Bindon, a shipwright by trade, who had been employed in one of the dockyards but had been lately discharged with a great number of his fellow-workmen, had applied for a passport, and had proceeded to Cherbourg with several other men. That was according to the statement of that man, but he was the only individual who was known to have asked for a passport, and he was not refused one. It had been said that the Admiralty had discharged a great number of men, and he would state how the case stood in that respect. In the last winter, when the work was slack in the private yards, a number of extra work- 211 men were put on in the dockyards, because there was a good sum of money under the Dockyard Vote in hand. Those men were, as he said, employed in the winter months, but with the warning that they would be discharged at the end of the financial year. But the Admiralty were anxious that, to prevent distress to the workmen, in consequence of a large number being thrown out of employ at one time, those discharges should be very gradual, and at times when private employment was very plentiful. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would not think they were unduly stinted in the dockyards when he (Lord Clarence Paget) told him they were now working there with 17,556 men, the greatest number ever employed at any former period in the present century, the greatest number employed during the great war with France being only 14,754. The hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. B. Osborne) wanted to know whether the men who had been discharged were sent away in consequence of there not being a sufficient quantity of timber in store. [Mr. B. OSBORNE: That was the reason given.] That might be part of the reason, but it was to be hoped they were not going to keep that enormous mass of men permanently employed in the dockyards. If they were kept constantly at work, of course, the stock of timber would soon be exhausted; but according to the ordinary consumption, they had now two years' stock of timber in hand, and his hon. Friend would find that the interests of the country were not neglected in that respect.
§ LORD CLARENCE PAGETcontinued: The hon. and gallant Member for Brighton (Sir G. Pechell) had asked him whether it was the intention of the Admiralty to give the same extra pay and allowances to the naval forces now in China as to those in India. He was afraid of saying anything which might engender hopes which might be disappointed; but he could assure his hon. Friend that the Admiralty would act strictly according to precedent, whatever that might be, and would do justice to the naval forces employed; but he could not distinctly answer the question as to what the allowances would be.