HC Deb 27 June 1862 vol 167 cc1151-2
SIR JOHN HAY

said, it would be in the recollection of the House that the claims of certain Reserved Officers of the Navy had been occasionally discussed, and a good case appeared to have been made out in their favour and some high legal authorities had given an opinion in their favour. The Admiralty, however, had submitted their claims to the consideration of the Law Officers of the Crown who had decided against them. He thought the gentlemen whose claims were thus decided upon were entitled to know what case had been submitted to the Law Officers, or to have a Select Committee appointed to see upon what grounds the decision to which he referred had been given. The captains themselves had submitted their case to very high legal authority, whose opinion was quite different from that of the Law Officers of the Crown. He begged, therefore, to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the case of the reserved Captains.

Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "a Select Committee be appointed, to inquire into the case of the Reserved Captains of Her Majesty's Navy, —instead thereof.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT

seconded the Motion.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

assured his hon. and gallant Friend that the Admiralty had given the most careful consideration to the case of these officers, and the more so because it had been stated that the Order in Council by which their positions were fixed was not clearly worded. Did the hon. and gallant Gentleman suppose that the Admiralty had laid an unfair statement of the case before the Law Officers? [Sir JOHN HAY said he had not made any such imputation.] He was glad that his gallant Friend did not impugn the honesty of the Admiralty. The Admiralty had given the Law Officers every information in their power; they stated the case fully, for as well as against the captains; and the Law Officers, after carefully going into the facts, gave their opinion. It was not usual to produce the opinion of the Law Officers, and he regretted that circumstance in the present instance.

MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE

paid, as the noble Lord seemed to admit that there had been a misunderstanding, that circumstance should operate in favour of these officers.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

The House divided:—Ayes 108; Noes 92: Majority 16.