HC Deb 21 April 1864 vol 174 cc1469-73
SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, he wished to put the Questions to the noble Lord the Secretary of the Admiralty of which he had given notice. The first Question referred to the present state of the Channel fleet. The information which he had received led him to infer that this fleet was not in the state of efficiency in which it ought to be. He wished to know from the noble Lord, whether he could furnish such information as would remove this impression; and if it was desirable that, under existing circumstances, the Channel fleet should remain for so long a period in the Portland Roads? The Channel fleet returned in the month of March, after a cruise of three months in the Atlantic, and it had not been sent to any arsenal for the purpose of having the necessary repairs effected to place it in a state of efficiency. He had heard many suggestions, and some of them from high quarters, during the debates in both Houses on the Danish Question, that looking to the war now carried on in the North of Europe, it would be desirable that the fleet should be in a condition to be sent off on a short notice to perform any duties which it might be called upon to perform. He therefore thought he was justified in calling attention to the subject. The information he had received was this:—When the Channel fleet came to Portland after the cruise, it wanted provisions and coals; but neither were to be had. At first the Admiral applied for 900 tons of coals, and was told that there were only 50 at hand, and that it would take three weeks to obtain a further supply from Cardiff. A week elapsed before they obtained their provisions; and after a lapse of three weeks only 280 tons of coal had been supplied. He was also informed that it was impossible to carry out the required repairs, owing to the disadvantages of the anchorage at Portland. The fleet was last repaired in December; and as a portion of it was iron clad, it was notorious that these became very foul after a time at sea. They had been out on a cruise in the Atlantic, and it would be remembered they had gone as far as Madeira at a time that it was supposed they would be ordered home. They were then likely to require repairs. The fleet were now at Portland, and might be ordered to foreign service on short notice; but, in the present condition of many of the ships, it would be impossible for them to go until they had been docked for repairs. Until they had been docked, it would be impossible to send them on this service. This would require a considerable time, for he was sorry to say that the dock accommodation was so limited that they could only go into dock one after another. He did not know whether his noble Friend would be able to contradict the reports he had heard, but he thought the House ought to be informed whether the detention of these ships so long at Portland was consistent with that efficiency which was so essential to the navy. The other Question which he wished to ask was founded on a statement given by the noble Lord in reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone (Mr. Corry) on a former evening. His right hon. Friend drew attention to the unsatisfactory state of the reserves in the home ports, and the noble Lord, with a candour which was more creditable to himself than to the Admiralty, admitted that the reserve fleet was not in a satisfactory condition. He (Sir John Pakington) wished to know how far steps had been taken to remedy this state of things. Was the House to infer from the noble Lord's admission that the Admiralty had determined to neglect the wooden fleet? This was a serious matter. He believed that the time had not yet come when the wooden ships of England could be neglected. At this time they had not sufficient iron armour vessels to carry on a maritime war, and must depend on their wooden ships to protect their commerce and possessions in all parts of the world; it would, then, be a great mistake to allow them to fall into a state of decay. He would be glad to hear that the Admiralty intended to maintain them in a state of efficiency, so that they should be ready for any service they might be called to perform. He would then ask the noble Lord as to the state of the Channel fleet, and the vessels in the home ports.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

said, he wished the right hon. Baronet had put his Question upon the paper in more specific terms, as he was not prepared to state offhand what quantity of coals or provisions would be required to be taken on board the ships forming the Channel squadron. All he could say was that the squadron was ordered to be ready for sea, fully provided with coals and stores, by the 15th of the present month. It was known that probably some of the ships might be sent north, and by the 15th of April it was expected the ice would be broken up in the Baltic. Those ships were all ready, but how long they had been engaged in taking on board provisions and coals he could not say, but he believed there had been no delay, although the question of the right hon. Baronet would induce him to make closer inquiries into that question. With respect to the state of our iron-ships he could not state the last date of docking, but he did not believe that their bottoms could be in such a state as to render them unfit for service. There was no doubt that iron bottomed-ships did require constant docking, and that constituted their chief defect. For that reason the Admiralty were giving their best attention to the subject of providing increased dock accommodation. With respect to our ships in the reserve, he had already stated that they were not in the condition in which he could desire to see them; but he had proposed a large labour vote to enable them to be placed in a better condition. He would, however, remind the right hon. Baronet that, while the reserve during his tenure of office consisted only of four line of-battle ships, three frigates, and three sloops, the reserve at present included three armourplated ships, two line-of-battle ships, three frigates, two corvettes, and three sloops. The reserve, therefore, had not deteriorated. [Sir JOHN PAKINGTON: Are they fit for service?] They are fit for service now; and I hope next year will be in a still more satisfactory state.

MR. CORRY

said, the noble Lord, in moving the Navy Estimates, had said that it was intended to pay off sixty-four ships in the course of the year, and therefore it would he necessary to have a large labour Vote to enable the Admiralty to replace thorn. That Vote, therefore, would not tend to increase the efficiency of the reserve. The Admiralty ought to place the ships paid off on the steam reserve, and have the ships forming the naval reserve ready for sea whenever their services might be required. One part of the service ought not to be neglected because attention was directed to another. The whole reserve ought to be kept in a state of efficiency. The comparison which the noble Lord had made between the reserve at the present time, and that which existed during the time when the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich was in office, was not exactly correct, as the Government of 1859 had not had the advantage of five years' tenure of office to re-organize the navy. The right hon. Baronet at that time asked for a Vote to increase the number of artificers in order to bring the reserve up to a proper condition.

Main Question put, and agreed to.

Forward to