HC Deb 03 June 1864 vol 175 cc1147-67
SIR JOHN HAY

said, he rose to move the Resolution of which he had given notice, with respect to the recommendation of the Royal Commission of 1860, confirmed by the Report of Sir Richard Bromley, one of the present Commissioners, and by the letter of Admiral Sir James Gordon, the Governor of Greenwich Hospital, that the present system of double government be abolished. It had been long acknowledged by every one capable of forming an opinion, that the existing system of government of Greenwich Hospital ought to be remodelled. In the first year of the present Parliament the late Sir Charles Napier called attention to the condition of the Hospital, and in consequence a Royal Commission was appointed in 1859 to inquire into its management. That Commission sat for six months, and was attended, he believed, on every occasion by all its Members; it was presided over by the Vice President of the Board of Control, and the hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ingham) and himself were the other Members. The Commission reported in May, 1860. They found that that great institution, which had been founded for the support of aged and disabled seamen, their wives, widows, and children, was no longer popular among the seamen of the navy, and that the wives and widows were totally neglected. They also found that the Hospital, which was calculated to maintain 2,300 pensioners, had at the time of their inquiry only about 1,500 inmates. They found, also, that there were 1,100 seamen in the workhouses of England alone (besides those in Scotland and Ireland of whom they had no return) who were proper objects of this charity. They found further that the cost of the administration for the 1,600 inmates was above £47,000 a year. They found that of the whole £155,000 a year belonging to the Hospital less than a third was spent on the charity. The Royal Commission went carefully into that matter, and they found that without injury to any of the interests which appeared to have been involved in the mismanagement, the administration of the Hospital might be reduced to £26,000 or £27,000 a year. They found that the misgovernment was attributable principally to the existence of a double government establishment in 1829. In that year the civil affairs of the Hospital were confided to certain civil Commissioners, who were called Commissioners of Greenwich Hospital, and the military administration as it was called, the internal management of the Hospital, was confided to a military governor and his subordinates, who generally were naval officers of dis- tinction. After that double government was established, the civil government was filled by the political adherents of the party in power, and that continued to 1842. The consequence was that the funds of the Hospital were diverted to the payment of what must be called political sinecures, and the Commissioners did not interfere with or attend to the management. One civil commissioner, the late Lord Auckland, and the governor, Sir Richard Keates, were on excellent terms with each other, and they contrived to manage the affairs of the Hospital in harmony. In 1842 the late Sir Robert Peel thought it was not proper that the funds of such an institution as Greenwich Hospital should be used for the payment of political sinecures. When vacancies occurred from death, since that date, the post of Commissioner had usually been filled by officers of the navy, appointed in consequence of their services. These Commissioners had attended actively to the affairs of the Hospital, but the Royal Commission found that their management was far from beneficial. It was true that in the management of the property they had exercised a due discretion; but in every relation which they bore to the military governor there had been a clashing of interests, and the quarrels between the two governors had resulted in great injury to the Hospital. He would call the attention of the House to the evidence adduced before the Royal Commission by witnesses whose names carried with them great weight. The late Sir James Graham came before the Royal Commission, and in his evidence stated— I think, upon the whole, a re-construction of the governing body is necessary; I see no necessity for more than one civil Commissioner. The right hon. Baronet then stated to the Commissioners facts in support of his view, that the existing system was a most disadvantageous one, and he added— I should say the Governor for the time being should be chairman of the Commission. Sir John Liddell, who for many years had been the principal medical officer of the establishment, and owing to whose exertions many ameliorations had taken place in the condition of the pensioners, was asked this question— Do you think that the Governor might with advantage be united to the Commissioners? And he answered— Yes; I think it would put an end to all those differences if he was chairman of the board. In fact, the whole of the evidence taken by the Commissioners went to show the great disadvantage of the double government. As he had said, the Royal Commission presented their Report in 1860; and it was then believed that the Admiralty approved of the suggestions it contained, and were prepared to carry them out. His noble Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty stated in March, 1861, what all the world knew, that the government of Greenwich Hospital was extremely defective; and in the same year the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty, in another place, on introducing a Bill for abolishing the double government, and carrying out other recommendations of the Royal Commission, made a similar declaration. For some reason or other that Bill was withdrawn, and from that day no steps had been taken by the Admiralty to alter the system of government of Greenwich Hospital. He must do the Admiralty the justice to say that many of the minor recommendations of the Royal Commission had been carried out to the advantage of the Hospital; but the flagrant evil of the two governments continually clashing together, and costing twice the sum for administration that was necessary, had not been taken in hand by the Admiralty. During the course of last Session, the hon. Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld) who was then a Lord of the Admiralty, gave the House to understand that he had inquired into the matter, and he gave the assurance that, in consequence, a well known public servant, Sir Richard Bromley, had been appointed Commissioner of the Hospital, with a view of reporting on the Report of the Royal Commission, and of suggesting to the Admiralty what portion of their Report was worthy of adoption. In consequence, nothing further was done in the course of last Session. The Report of Sir Richard Bromley was in the hands of hon. Members; and although in some minute details he did not entirely coincide with the Royal Commissioners, yet he fully bore them out in the opinion that the system of double government was faulty, and that most of the abuses of the Hospital were to be traced to the want of harmony between the two governing bodies. Lastly, he would draw attention to the fact that the military governor of the Hospital, Sir James Gordon—a most able and distinguished officer, who had been both governor and lieutenant governor of the Hospital—had, in a letter dated 11th April, 1864, confirmed the evidence which he gave before the Royal Commission, that the double system of government in existence at Greenwich was extremely detrimental to the public service and very much to the disadvantage of the pensioners for whom the Hospital was originally created. In consequence of this—in consequence of the fact that the Royal Commission had urged very strongly on the Admiralty the change in the system of government—in consequence of the Report of the Commissioner appointed by the Admiralty coinciding in that opinion—in consequence of the Report of the Governor of Greenwich Hospital, himself no mean authority in this matter, that the Report of the Royal Commissioners and the Report of the Commissioner to whom their Report was referred, that their recommendations ought to be carried out to promote harmony in the management of the Hospital—and in consequence of the saving that would be gained by the adoption of those recommendations, he thought it desirable that the Admiralty adopt the recommendation of the Royal Commission of 1860.

MR. LIDDELL

said, he rose to second the Motion. He earnestly hoped that the House would join his hon, and gallant Friend in endeavouring to obtain from the Admiralty, or those who represented the Admiralty in that House, some explanation of what, to his mind, was the inexplicable tardiness which had been shown in dealing with the affairs of Greenwich Hospital. He supposed that no public question ever stood in so remarkable a position. A Royal Commission on the Hospital made recommendations; a Commissioner was appointed expressly to inquire into the merits of those recommendations; he approved them; and another set of Commissioners were directed to inquire into his Report. There were a multiplication of Reports all concurring, and yet nothing had been done to remove the evil, which was inseparable from the existing system, and which had been on all hands pointed out as a great abuse of administration and a great waste of funds. He would venture to remind the House that last year, when the Question was brought before the consideration of Parliament, it was predicted — and the prediction required no large amount of foresight—that the appointment of Sir Richard Bromley would create an antagonism within the walls of Greenwich Hospital greater than ever existed before. The double government, however, was not changed. At that time of day it seemed to be a work of supererogation to prove the obstacles and the utter absurdity of a double government. A double government did exist at Greenwich in spite of all the recommendations which had been made against it. In spite of Sir Richard Bromley's appointment for the express purpose of instituting reform nothing had been done. He never could understand why Greenwich Hospital should not be governed at Greenwich. Instead of that there was a body of military officers entirely controlled by a body of Civil Commissioners, of late years appointed from the ranks of naval officers. So that they had a man of the highest rank in the navy supported by a man of equal weight as his lieutenant governor, presiding over the establishment, and passing rules for the maintenance of discipline and the regulation of the inmates; and yet they were entirely controlled by subordinate officers of the same profession as civil officers. Such a system was certain to produce rivalry and antagonism, as they saw existing. When the Commissioners, in reply to Sir Richard Bromley's Report, stated that the funds of the Hospital had been managed with great care, and that no absolute case of peculation could be proved to have existed, they used that fact in support of their statement that the constitution had worked successfully for thirty years. No doubt, with men of the high position and integrity of the Civil Commissioners no case of peculation had arisen. But what he complained of was this—that a mode of management had been in practice which had entailed enormous unnecessary expenditure upon the Hospital, and that during the whole of that time no effort whatever had been made to curtail that expenditure, which had been proved to be absurdly large; and, more than that, that all the improvements which had been of late introduced had been forced upon them by pressure from without. If it could be shown by the careful observations conducted by Sir Richard Bromley that no less a sum than £8,000 a year had been expended in the civil administration of that Hospital, it followed that had a proper system of management been adopted a saving of £8,000 a year would have been the result. That was a matter of great importance, for it must be remembered that if we were unhappily involved in a war, a naval engagement might at any time throw 300 or 400 additional inmates on the resources of the Hospital. Each inmate, Sir Richard Bromley calculated, cost altogether about £60 a year; therefore 400 new pensioners would represent an additional charge of £24,000 a year. It was thus of great importance to husband the resources of the Hospital in time of peace, and if it could be shown that a consolidation of authority would lead to a great saving, there could not be a stronger argument in its favour. One single word on another point. At various times, and in various quarters, the idea had been broached, that Greenwich Hospital ought to be transferred from its present condition to that of a simple infirmary for the reception of the disabled, and sick, and aged. He was far from saying that that idea was not well worthy the consideration of the House, but he thought its present adoption would be premature. Successful efforts had been made recently to ameliorate by a great expenditure the condition of the pensioner. Only last year a Bill was brought into that House to do that, the want of which ever since its foundation had been a crying evil — namely, a provision for the widows, the wives, and the children. In addition, the first-class men were last year allowed an increased allowance of 2s. a week for improved lodgings. He, therefore, asked the House before turning the Hospital into an infirmary, to wait and see what would be the effect on the pensioners and on the whole tone of the service generally, of these recent changes. What was asked that night was simply that the Government should be true to themselves so to speak, and consent to the course recommended—namely, an amalgamation of the civil and military authorities of Greenwich Hospital, by which the whole might be blended into one harmonious operation.

Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "it is desirable that the Admiralty adopt the recommendation of the Royal Commission of 1860, confirmed by the Report of Sir Richard Bromley, one of the present Commissioners, and by the letter of Admiral Sir James Gordon, the Governor of Greenwich Hospital, that the present system of double government be abolished,"— (Sir John Hay,) —instead thereof.

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

MR. ADAM

said, he, for one, thanked the hon. and gallant Member for Wake-field for bringing forward the question, which he was glad to see was put upon its proper footing. It was no use to attempt to remedy the evils in the management of Greenwich Hospital without going to the root of the matter, which was the system of government going on there. The course which the Admiralty had pursued with respect to the question under discussion was, in his opinion, most extraordinary. They had for some reason or other put off dealing with it from year to year. They had chosen to withdraw a Bill which had been introduced on the subject a short time ago, which might have passed into a law, and by which a considerable reform might have been effected. The Admiralty then went to sleep, and were roused from their slumbers only by some letters which had appeared in The Times, and by the speeches of the hon. Gentlemen opposite. They thereupon appointed Sir R. Bromley, and he had made a report which fell like a bomb-shell on the rest of the Commissioners, The working of the constitution of the Hospital, he might add, was not a little extraordinary also. The government had been called a double, but it was in reality a three-fold government, comprising, as it did, the Governor, the Commissioners, and the Admiralty. The Governor was responsible for the well-being of the Hospital and the comfort of its inmates; yet he was not allowed to drive a nail in any part of the building without consulting the Commissioners. In support of his statement he would read an extract from the last letter which appeared in The Times on the subject. It said— The three Commissioners live away from the Hospital and come down once a week and spend an hour there. Their principal occupation is to quarrel with the Governor. The Governor told the Commission of 1860 that they never called upon him to consult upon the business of the Hospital, for the welfare of which they were all alike appointed. They confine themselves to rejecting, in terms of greater or less discourtesy, every application which he makes for the good of the pensioners. The office of the Admiralty at Whitehall is full of the angry correspondence which the two departments of the Hospital address to head-quarters, each complaining of the other. The civil department, apart from the house room and repairs, cost the Hospital, in 1859, £12,635 a year, or the equivalent of the allowances recommended by the Commission of 1860 for 420 pensioners' wives and 840 pensioners' children. The fact was that all reforms were first recommended by the Governor, that he applied to the Commissioners, and that they invariably refused to sanction his recommendations. He then appealed to the Admiralty, and they, having something else to do, said as much as that they wished he would not bother them. The Governor thereupon usually went back to the Commissioners, who again received him with a refusal, and he had to return time after time to the Admiralty, until at last the proposed reforms were carried into effect. Such was the way in which the business of Greenwich Hospital was managed, and it was to the credit of the Admiralty that, although somewhat slow in their action, they had in the end carried out many of the details of those reforms which were considered necessary. The manner which he described was not, however, that in which such an institution as Greenwich Hospital ought to be governed. It was an establishment which was of great importance, not only to the men who were kept there in their old age, but also as holding out a certain prospect to the young who were likely to enter the navy. The Admiralty did not, in his opinion, give sufficient facilities for men in the country to apply to get into the Hospital. There were, he thought, two ways in which the present state of things might be remedied. The one was by such a change in the government as was proposed by his hon. and gallant Friend opposite; the other was by the mode shadowed forth by the hon. Member for Northumberland (Mr. Liddell) — by reducing the institution from the position which it held, and making it somewhat more of an infirmary. Before adopting the latter alternative, however, he would impress on the Admiralty the expediency of trying what good the change proposed by his hon. and gallant Friend would effect before converting into a mere infirmary a great national institution.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he thought the observations which had been made by his hon. and gallant Friend who had proposed the Amendment before the House must have been sufficient to satisfy all who heard him that the question of Greenwich Hospital was not one which could be dealt with in a few moments, but that there were grave considerations at stake, requiring the most serious deliberation. He could not help feeling, at the same time, that there was no disposition on the part of hon. Gentlemen on either side to take up the subject in a party spirit, but to deal with it simply in its bearing upon the welfare of our seamen, and with a view to discovering to what extent that most noble institution could be applied to their advantage, and through them, to the advantage of the State. His hon. Friend who had first spoken had, he might add, great claims to address the House upon the Question. He was a member of a Commission which took great pains to inquire into it, and whose Report was very properly described by his hon. Friend the Member for Halifax as eminently suggestive. It was a Report which was suggestive to the House and to the Admiralty, and it was satisfactory to find that his hon. Friend had been followed in the discussion on the present occasion by one who, as connected with one of the best and greatest governors of the Hospital, was well entitled to advise the House upon the Question. He need hardly add that ever since the Report to which he alluded had appeared, the Government had held much the same views which his hon. and gallant Friend who opened the discussion advocated, and that they had in 1861 brought in a Bill to carry out those views. That measure failed, and he need not point out the reasons why. It was in some respects not quite matured, and he, for one, was not sorry that more time had been given for the discussion of the subject. He hoped the House would allow him shortly to review the present position of the Hospital, and to state the general view of the Government with respect to the arrangements in its regard which ought in future to be carried out. A statement of the present condition of that institution would, he could not help thinking, somewhat startle those hon. Gentlemen whose idea of it was that it was a place solely devoted to the relief of a number of old and infirm seamen and marines, after they could no longer serve the public. Those who looked on Greenwich Hospital as a receptacle for such men, of course expected that their number bore a fair proportion to the entire revenue and expenditure of the institution, and would, therefore, be surprised to learn that there were at the present moment no more than 1,500 seamen and marines in the institution, while its entire revenue was a little over£150,000; that, mother words, for every £100 of revenue there was only one seaman or marine within its walls. That alone was a matter which deserved very serious attention. The property of the Hospital was, in round numbers, as follows:—Estates producing £43,800 per annum; capital in the funds, bank stock, &c., £2,906,324; an annual payment from the Consolidated Fund of £20,000 in lieu of what were called seamen's sixpences, and other sources, making the total income for the last year £154,000. The total expenditure was £134,000, of which £22,000 was debited to the school, £85,000 to the household, £15,000 to the infirmary, £9,000 to repairs and new works, and £1,800 to other charges. The balance last year was£20,000, out of which £2,700 — an amount which he thought excessive — was set aside for insurance, £2,000 was applied under the Act of last Session for the benefit of the widows, and £8,000 was reserved for the time when provision might be required for a larger number of seamen. The salaries and allowances of all kinds payable in the Hospital and infirmary (excluding the school) amounted to £25,100, of which nearly £5,000 was for civil officers, between £8,000 and £9,000 for military officers, between £2,000 and £3,000 for medical officers, nearly £4,000 for clerks, and £4,900 for retiring and other allowances. The expense of nurses, servants, and police amounted to £10,400; so that the entire cost of the management, including servants of every kind, amounted, according to last year's accounts, to £35,500. The cost of maintaining the pensioners, who were between 1,500 and 1,600 in number, was £63,000, or nearly as possible £40 each. Works in connection with the Hospital cost £4,400, and the allowances to widows amounted to-£2,000. Exclusive of the school, about the efficiency of which there was no question, the present cost of the Hospital was £107,700 per annum, or about £70 for each pensioner maintained in it. The cost had been reduced by £3,000 or £4,000 since the Royal Commissioners reported. Those Commissioners spoke of the Hospital as requiring a very stringent reform, and said that if the measures which they recommended failed it would be the duty of the Government to introduce still more important changes. The Commissioners recommended that the number of pensioners then in the Hospital, 1,676, should be raised to 2,300, and they suggested the following financial arrangement to meet the additional charge which such an increase would occasion. They recommended that £3,175 for the half-pay of the officers, und £23,000 for the out-pensions of the men in the Hospital, instead of being stopped as at present, should be paid by the public to the Hospital funds; and that, in addition, the Hos- pital should receive from the admirals and captains of the Royal Navy, being the proportions of the freight of treasure now divided between those ranks, estimated at £6,000 a year. To this was to be added a small saving of £300; and thus rather more than £32,000 would be available for the maintenance of additional pensioners. At the same time, they recommended that the charge for the establishment of the Hospital should be reduced by £16,700, and that for works by £4,300, so that the total sum available would be about£53,000. The expense of maintaining the additional 624 pensioners was estimated by the Commissioners at £15,000, which he was afraid was rather below the mark; and they recommended that £10,544 should be added to the money allowances of the pensioners in the Hospital, bringing them up to something like £6 per man. The average amount now paid, however, was between £9 and £10, so that this charge would be insufficient. The Commissioners also recommended a capital expenditure of £62,000 upon buildings for the reception of the wives and children of pensioners, and an annual charge of £33,000 to be paid to them as gratuities. In other words, the recommendation was that provision should be made for 624 persons at a cost which he thought had been rather underestimated, and also that a new institution should be established for the wives and children of pensioners at an annual charge equivalent to the interest upon a million and a quarter; two-thirds of the extra expense being voted by Parliament. What had been done towards carrying into effect the Report of the Commission? The recommendations which referred to the comfort of the pensioners had, there was no question, been fairly carried out, and in regard to gratuities had been exceeded. The Commissioners recommended that gratuities should be given to the men ranging from 1s. 2d. to 3s. 6d. per week. The gratuities actually paid had varied from 3s. to 5s. Since the date of the Report eleven civil and military officers had been struck off the establishment; during the last year the offices of one captain, two lieutenants, a clerk of the check, and a clerk had been abolished, causing a saving of £1,940 a year. Since his Friend the Member for Halifax addressed the House upon the subject last year several additional advantages had been conferred upon the pensioners—2s. a week was now granted to each married pen- sioner, their wives were buried at the public expense, and a fund had been formed out of which the cost of sending the widows and children to their families would be defrayed. Except in the case of the enormous grant of nearly £40,000 a year to the wives and children of pensioners, the recommendations of the Commissioners had, as far as they affected the pensioners themselves, been fairly carried out. Notwithstanding that, however, the number of pensioners in the Hospital had fallen to 1,508—that was, the number had diminished by 168 since the date of the Commissioners' Report. That fact of itself was sufficient to show that the reforms then recommended were not sufficient, that there was something radically wrong with the Hospital, and that the time had come, not for its abolition, but for the adoption of some, not precipitate, but well considered, measures, which would cause its funds to be applied to the benefit of those for whom the foundation was designed. He did not think there was any foundation for the charge that the Government had not taken sufficient means to make the benefits of the Hospital known in the country. The real difficulty was adverted to in the Report of the Commission for Manning the Navy, and any legislation adopted by the House must be founded upon their recommendation. They pointed out that the Hospital had an available income of about £150,000, and that, under judicious arrangements, it would be found capable of meeting the wants of all worn-out and disabled seamen, whether they belonged to the Royal Navy or to the Volunteer Force. "Men," they add, "who have adequate pensions for their support, and who have families or friends to take care of them, are better in their own homes than in any establishment of this description." That went to prove that it was not desirable to attract seamen to the Hospital by giving them increased pecuniary advantages. The object of the founders of the Hospital was to find an asylum, or to make provision for those who had no families or friends able to support them, and who were not entitled to out-pensions of a sufficient amount on which to enable them to exist comfortably. It was, however, doubtful whether it was a wise policy to attract such men to Greenwich, and to spend larger sums in keeping them there than would maintain them comfortably at home. The language of the Commission of 1860 was entirely consis- tent with that of the Commission on Manning the Navy, although on the question of attracting the men to Greenwich they took a somewhat opposite view. They recommended that a sum of £40,000 a year should be expended on the wives and families of seamen, that they should be brought to Greenwich, and that cottages or model lodging-houses should be provided for their residences. No one could fail to see that this was an attempt to combine two inconsistent things. The seamen were to be kept together in a great monastic institution combining the advantages of numbers and efficient medical attendance, and their families were also to be concentrated at Greenwich and maintained at a far greater cost than would be sufficient to support them in their own villages. It was more than doubtful whether, if the families of seamen ought to be brought together, Greenwich was the best town for such a concentration. Let the House compare the position of seamen in the present day with their prospects 100 or even twenty or thirty years ago. What chance had they then of obtaining wages or employment in other callings? The average age of the inmates of the Hospital on admission was only fifty-four years. Every one knew that the rate of wages, the comforts of the labouring classes, and the possibility of obtaining employment had greatly increased during the last few years. It was now no longer necessary to provide for the wants of the sailor as in former times, as his character was greatly altered for the better. The sailor of a few years since was, as he is now, gallant, loyal, and worthy of his country; but he belonged to an improvident class, and possessed very little means of adapting himself to other pursuits in life. But of late years the character of the sailors had been enormously improved. They had become more domesticated, and could turn their hands more readily to other pursuits. They were far more able therefore to find employment, and to settle down in their old age among their friends in all parts of the country. Upon these grounds he thought the time had arrived when the Government might with perfect safety gradually adopt, as pointed out by the evidence taken before the Commissioners, the recommendations which were distinctly shadowed out in their Report. In stating what the Government professed to do, he wished to take no credit for himself, as he was but explain- ing the views of the Board of Admiralty generally; views which the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty had proposed and embodied in a memorandum, which he would at once move for; and so far as the functions of the particular office he held were concerned, the merit was due to the hon. Member for Halifax, who had preceded him, rather than to himself. The policy of the Government, therefore, was this. At present the qualifications for admission to Greenwich Hospital were classified as follows:—In the first place every seaman, whatever his service, who was wounded or injured in the service, and was incapable to maintain himself, was admissible to the Hospital. If he had only been in the service a few days or months he was qualified, provided he had been wounded or injured and so disabled in the service. The next class were seamen having out-pensions of £9, that was 6d. per day, and who were incapable of maintaining themselves. The third class were seamen who had served full time, and who were unfit for further service at sea, though able to maintain themselves otherwise. The fourth class were special cases. The Government proposed to limit the admission to the Hospital in future to infirm and helpless sailors and marines who could not be maintained in comfort elsewhere. That arrangement would meet the objections that were expressed against making the Hospital a mere receptacle for the sick, while it would probably diminish the numbers of the inmates from 1,500 to 600. It was proposed to apply the saving towards increasing the out-pensions for seamen after certain ages, and providing additional retirements for the ranks of officers who now benefited by the appointments in the Hospital. With respect to the future government of the Hospital, they proposed to get rid altogether of the double government. The proposal would, in short, be this—the Hospital would be governed by some person in the position of admiral superintendent, with two or three naval officers as lieutenants for purposes of discipline, and those gentlemen would have the entire charge of the institution. There would be a sufficient number of medical officers, as at present, attached to the institution; and all the appointments should be staff appointments for five years. The government of the institution would be in fact like that of Haslar or Chelsea. With respect to those naval officers who were at present employed in the Hospital, whether in a civil or military character, it would be entirely in consonance with the views of the Government, as well as of the House, that they should be fully compensated for the loss of their position. Nor would they be disturbed in their present residences. Of course it might be possible to transfer those who held the office of clerks to positions elsewhere. With respect to the management of the funds of the institution, it might be a question in what relation they should stand to the general funds of the country —whether it would be well to keep up the form of a separate fund altogether removed from the view of that House, or whether by some arrangement they might not be combined with the funds of the nation, while a careful and separate account of them was still kept. The increased rates of out-pensions would be fixed by law. On this point he might say chat the Government did not agree with the recommendation of the Commission, that the funds of the Hospital were intended to be solely for the benefit of the seamen. It was the original intention to apply a certain amount of the fund for the benefit of old officers of different ranks in the navy, and the Government would propose that such an arrangement should be continued. The whole arrangements with respect to the scale of out-pensions, the additional benefit to the different classes of officers, and the management of the institution, would become the subject of inquiry by a joint committee of the Treasury and Admiralty during the recess; the details of the scheme would be carefully matured by the officers of both Departments, and at the commencement of next Session the Government would be perfectly ready to submit the scheme itself to any investigation the House might think fit. With respect to the funds of the Hospital, the present income was £154,000, and the cost of the future establishment would be as follows: —The infirmary it was calculated would cost about £15,000, maintenance of out-pensioners £23,000, works, including those of the school, £5,500, pensions to widows £5,000, school £23,000, making a total of £71,500, which would leave a balance of above £80,000 to be dealt with partly, as now, by way of accumulation with a view to heavier charges in the event of a war, but mainly for the benefit of the old sailors and officers of the service. By the last Returns there were between 360 and 370 persons in the infirmary and helpless ward, but the future arrangements would include provision for about 600. The Government fully appreciated all that hon. Members had said as to the valuable services of Sir Richard Bromley, and he hoped in whatever arrangements would be made the services of Sir Richard Bromley would be retained for the institution. He might add that as some wings of the Hospital would not be required in the reduced plan, and as there would be sure to be a group of claimants for their use, their disposal would be matter for the most careful consideration. He had attempted to make his statement as full as he could, and to include such general explanations and important details which it might be satisfactory for the country to receive. The Admiralty were not making what could be called a romantic proposition, and he must admit that it tended to dispel some of those ideas which were attached to the Hospital. It was not their wish, however, to do away with, but to maintain the original character of the institution; and their scheme, if prosaic in some of its details, would, he was sure, be for the good of the service; and if the sailor who might then find a harbour of refuge within its walls should not by-and-by find it as open as before, he would, at all events, receive such additional advantages for his wife, his family, and himself as, he trusted, would prove by the result that the Government were justified in making the change.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, after the clear and very interesting statement which the hon. Gentleman had made, and which the House on every account had heard with satisfaction, he should wish to make a few remarks. In the first place, he had to express his great gratification that the Government had decided to deal at once with the matter, for the time had arrived when something ought to be done, both with respect to the system of government and the whole mode of management of that magnificent institution. When the Royal Commission made a Report some time ago, and that was followed by another able Report by Sir R. Bromley, the Government had ample information at hand for dealing with the subject. He would not offer any opinion on the statement of the hon. Gentleman; but he would go as far as this, and say that it appeared to him that the principles on which the Board of Admiralty intended to proceed were sound. The House would receive with general satisfaction the announcement that the system of double government would be put an end to. He confessed he had been somewhat surprised at the recommendation contained in another report—namely, that the office of Governor of the Hospital should for the future be regarded as a sinecure, and be held by some gentleman who should not have any duties connected with it. He was very glad to hear that the Admiralty had decided rather to adopt the plan recommended by Sir Richard Bromley. On one point he was afraid he differed, not only from the Royal Commission and Sir Richard Bromley, but also from some Members in that House, with respect to the military officers of the Hospital. The recommendation was that the appointment of those officers should be cut down to five years. He could not but regard that with great doubt and jealousy. He believed it was a mistaken construction of the words of the original charter of the Hospital, which held that the institution was intended exclusively for seamen, and not at all for naval officers. He contended that the officers of the Royal Navy had every claim to share in its benefits as well as seamen. He did not clearly understand what were the intentions of the Admiralty on the point; he hoped, before the discussion closed, the House would receive further information on the subject. He should be very sorry to see any course taken which would operate harshly or unjustly upon officers of the Royal Navy; and he did hope, before the plans of the Admiralty were finally determined, they would give serious consideration to that part of the subject.

MR. INGHAM

said, that having been a member of the Royal Commission, he wished to express the satisfaction with which he had listened to the statement of his hon. Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty. He could not agree with some of the criticisms of the right hon. Baronet on the Report. No one who carefully read the Reports and the evidence on the point would be of the right hon. Gentleman's opinion as to the original design of the institution. The statutes, the charters, and, above all, the practice in its earliest and best days, showed that no person, unless below the rank of a warrant officer, was entitled to share in the charity. It was true that during the last two reigns the practice had been otherwise, but before that period the Hospital was exclusively for the benefit of common seamen. With respect to the remark of the right hon. Gentleman against the propriety of making the governorship a sinecure, that recommendation, it was to be remembered, was accompanied by a proviso that all the other officers were to be staff officers, and appointed only for a short time. He trusted the seamen would find even more comfort under the new arrangements, with an adequate pension, than they had enjoyed in the Hospital. He might state as an interesting fact connected with the Trinity House — a kindred institution— that some arrangements were being made by which, in lieu of certain almshouses at Deptford, which required to be rebuilt, old captains were to receive a money pension, which would be considered more valuable than an appointment to the alms-houses. He repeated that he had heard the statement as to the intention of the Admiralty on this subject with very great pleasure.

MR. ANGERSTEIN

said, he thought that scant justice had been done to the Commissioners of the Hospital. In his opinion the country was indebted to them for the conduct they had pursued. If there had been any mismanagement it should be recollected that the Admiralty were the superior authority, and the whole blame ought not to be thrown on the Commissioners. He was gratified at the spirit in which the Government had taken up the subject, and he hoped any determination to which they might come would prove beneficial to that service, which had been the glory of the country.

MR. CORRY

wished to know whether it was intended that the offices of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor of the Hospital should be held for only five years. That would, he thought, be a most objectionable arrangement. For his part, he should blush to see Sir James Gordon turned out of his office at the expiration of that period. He should also be glad to know what arrangements would be made with reference to the out-pensioners.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

said, that he was glad to see the feeling which had been displayed in reference to the proposals of the Government. These proposals, which had been explained to the House, were the result of very careful consideration, and he thought that in reference to some details which had been adverted to it would be perhaps better that he should lay on the table an interesting Memo- randum drawn up by the Duke of Somerset, explanatory of the disadvantages of the present government of Greenwich Hospital, and showing the necessity for a change. He would, therefore, now confine himself to giving an answer on some points which had been referred to in the course of the present discussion. With respect to the interests of officers in the navy, he was glad to hear the right hon. Member for Droitwich state in emphatic terms that they had a fair claim for their share of the advantages of Greenwich Hospital. That had been fully recognized by the fact that from the earliest period there always had been naval officers attached to the institution; and as the officers of the navy had contributed large sums towards its maintenance, it was impossible in any re-distribution that the claims of the officers should be omitted. Without going into great detail, he would state generally what was proposed. It was intended that Greenwich Hospital, like Haslar or any other naval hospital, should have a superintendent and a sufficient number of officers to maintain discipline. It was also hoped that, by means of the economies which would be effected, additional advantages might be provided for the sailors, so that they might receive a certain increase of pension after they had been pensioners for a certain number of years, and had arrived at a certain age. It was proposed to offer to the present inmates of the Hospital the option either to remain there for the rest of their days, or accept the improved pension he had just referred to. With respect to the officers, it was proposed to do away with the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, and all captains and officers beyond those who were necessary for the discipline of that Hospital. [Mr. CORRY: The Governor.] With regard to that most distinguished officer the present Governor, he should be sorry for any one to suppose that any injustice would be done to him. Speaking in reference to the future, it was proposed to devote a proportion of the savings consequent on the reduction of the establishment to the purpose of giving a certain increase in the number of good service pensions to officers in the navy. It was likewise proposed that there should be an addition to the number of the Greenwich out-pensions for officers; and, lastly, with respect to the officers now occupying posts in Greenwich Hospital, among whom was that most distinguished officer Sir James Gordon, it was intended to give them for life their present residences in the Hospital, or to allow them an equivalent in lieu. He need not advert to the provisions intended to be applied to the civil servants, for his hon. Friend (Mr. Childers) had already made so clear a statement on that head; but as he had heard it stated that encouragement ought to be given to the entry of men into Greenwich Hospital, he felt it necessary to state that, in his opinion, their entry ought rather as a rule to be discouraged. He believed that it would be much better for old seamen who had wives, families, relatives, or friends in the places of their birth, to return there for the purpose of enjoying their old age, and by recounting the events of their ocean life they might, perhaps, bring up many of the young people about them with a love for the sea. If this took place, the effect would be that Greenwich Hospital would be really an hospital or infirmary for old decrepit men, whom, from the circumstance of their having no families or friends, it would be an act of charity to look after. In all other cases he would discourage old seamen from going into the Hospital, and would rather endeavour, by improving their pensions, to make their old age happy and comfortable elsewhere.

MR. LIDDELL

What about the finances?

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

The finances would be kept entirely separate from the management of the Hospital. That question would be carefully inquired into by the Treasury and the Admiralty, with a view to a proposal being submitted to Parliament next Session in reference both to the landed and the funded property.

MR. CORRY

said, he wished to know how the Board of Management was to be constituted?

LORD CLARENCE PAGET

said, that there would be no such Board. The management would be intrusted to a superintendent and other officers, as at Haslar and other Hospitals.

SIR JOHN HAY

said, that after the satisfactory statement he had heard from the Admiralty authorities, he would withdraw his Motion.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Back to