HC Deb 13 June 1865 vol 180 cc124-31

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Clauses 1 to 19, inclusive, agreed to.

Clause 20 (Government of Hospital, &c.)

MR. AYRTON

said, the Committee having now disposed of that portion of the Bill which related to pensions, he desired to express his satisfaction that the rights of merchant seamen to participate in the benefit of the funds accumulated for the Hospital had been recognized by the Admiralty; but, as there might be some doubt still existing upon this point from the wording of the Bill, he thought it desirable that a declaratory clause should be inserted, to show that the Greenwich Hospital was for the benefit of the merchant marine as well as of the Royal Navy, or that the House should have some distinct understanding from the Admiralty that they were not going to maintain Greenwich Hospital for exclusively Admiralty purposes. It had now become necessary that the hospital ship, the Dreadnought, should be done away with, and accommodation obtained in some convenient place on shore. To effect this object a sum of £660,000 would be necessary, which was a large amount to raise for a class whoso relations and friends were limited to the shore of any particular country. In former times the Hospital was recognized as a public charity, and it was entitled to receive all the waifs and strays of the commercial service, such as the unclaimed property of dead seamen; but, for the sake of public convenience, this was afterwards yielded up to the Board of Trade, with the promise that an equivalent should be given from a fund raised by a registration of tickets; but the Board of Trade shortly afterwards came to the conclusion that it was very desirable to abolish this system of registration of tickets, and the Hospital lost the whole of the equivalent which it was to receive. The Admiralty were about to empty to a large extent the Greenwich Hospital, and if not converted to some more appropriate purpose soon, he should not be surprised to find the building turned into comfortable residences for officers of the navy. He thought a portion of the building should be set apart for the reception of merchant seamen suffering from the various diseases to which they were subject, and this arrangement, he believed, would result in great benefit to the navy, as well as to the public generally. He concluded by moving Clause 20, after the word "schools," to insert the words, "whether belonging to the Royal Navy or otherwise employed in any service afloat."

MR. CHILDERS

said, he would ask his hon. Friend not to press for the insertion of these words, because they would be misunderstood, and would really add nothing to what Government meant in the existing words, which were almost identical. On some of the points mentioned by the hon. Member, there was little to say. One of these was how far Greenwich Hospital was originally intended for this or that class of seamen; and this could only be settled by documents of the reign of Queen Anne. One thing, however, was certain—that merchant seamen had not for 120 years past any rights in the Hospital, unless wounded in action with an enemy or with pirates. The Admiralty had no intention to depart from the principles which they had formerly adopted as to the admissions into Greenwich Hospital; and with respect to schools, there was no intention to alter the course hitherto followed, and by which, under certain circumstances, children of seamen belonging to the merchant service had a right to the school.

MR. LIDDELL

asked, whether the members of the Naval Reserve had a right of admission into the Hospital?

MR. CHILDERS

They have a right of admission—it is expressly reserved to them. With reference to the use of any part of the building for sick merchant seamen, he could only say there was nothing in the Bill which would prevent the Admiralty lending a portion of the building for the purposes of an hospital in lieu of the Dreadnought. He used the word "lend" advisedly, because in time of war it would be undesirable to deprive the navy of any space in the Hospital which might be wanted after a naval engagement. There were two sides to the question with reference to the granting of Greenwich Hospital for the use of the merchant service. It might be very charitable and considerate in the Government to give that service some advantage in connection with the institution; but, on the other hand, it must be taken into consideration how far the resources of private charity would be curtailed by the fact of this Government aid. The Governors of the Dreadnought hospital would, therefore, do well to see how far their support from private resources would be affected by its becoming known that they were receiving assistance from the public funds. He was afraid there were many of those by whom the charity was now supported who might say, "Government have taken charge of the institution, and there is no necessity for continuing our donations." The admission of these patients into Greenwich Hospital was a question which the Admiralty might fairly consider when it came before them. There was no intention on the part of the Admiralty to take away any of the rights which the merchant seamen now possessed.

MR. AYRTON

said, after the distinct statement of the hon. Gentleman, he thought it would be unnecessary to press the introduction of the words of which he had given notice. He therefore withdrew the Amendment.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT

concurred in what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Childers) as to the difficulties which would attend the admission of merchant seamen into the Greenwich Hospital.

Amendment withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 21 to 42, inclusive, agreed to.

Clause 43 (Devises, &c, for Hospital.)

MR. LIDDELL

said, he trusted the Committee would excuse him if he adverted to a matter that was personal to himself. He had to complain of some imperfect reporting of the observations which he had made on a former occasion in relation to this Bill. He was the more anxious to explain, inasmuch as the Report to which he had alluded had occasioned some pain and dissatisfaction to the naval chaplains. Now, he wished to guard himself from being supposed to utter any reproach against a class of gentlemen who, he believed, discharged their duties in a manner most creditable to themselves and advantageous to their respective cures. He had simply viewed the question in the abstract, and observed that a man who had passed a great portion of his life at sea was not, in his opinion, the most competent person to discharge important clerical duties on shore.

MR. CHILDERS

agreed with the hon. Member that it was much better to give these officers a retiring allowance than appoint them to livings in the country. But he, at the same time, wished to say that the hon. Member had used on the previous occasion no words which could cause pain to the present incumbents.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 45 to 50, inclusive, agreed to.

Clause 51 (Repayment to Consolidated Fund.)

MR. LIDDELL moved, as an Amendment, to leave out in line 31, from "relates" to the end of the clause, his object being to guard against any attempt of the Treasury to lay its hands upon the funds belonging to the Hospital.

MR. CHILDERS

said, it was only fair that the Bill which offered inducements to the inmates to go out of the Hospital, thus creating a charge upon the grants of Parliament, should transfer this extra charge to the Hospital funds.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

said, he could not see the justice of the arrangement, nor yet the advantage of it. The inducements given to live out of the Hospital should not be at the expense of that institution, and he hoped the Admiralty would re-consider the matter. He had the honour of being asked to present a petition from the Captains of Greenwich Hospital, praying the Admiralty, when depriving them of their position in the Hospital, to restore them to that position in the active list of officers which they would have occupied if they had not accepted of the appointment to Greenwich Hospital. He heartily concurred in the claims of those officers, which he believed were founded upon the most obvious principles of justice. There were three officers entitled to the flag if they had been on the active list, and he hoped the Admiralty would give their cases a favourable consideration.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT

also warmly advocated the claims of those officers to be placed upon the active list, and said he should consider it to be an act of the grossest injustice if the Admiralty were to reject their petition. Those officers asked for no increase of pay, or pecuniary consideration. They only prayed to be reinstated in that honourable rank which they had been induced to surrender when they accepted the appointment in Greenwich Hospital—an appointment which they at the time believed to be one for the whole of their lives.

MR. CORRY

also bore testimony to the justice of the claims of those officers. He had received a letter from one of those captains, stating that inasmuch as commanders, lieutenants, and others, were to be allowed this been, he could not understand why the Captains should be excluded from participating in it. With reference to the case of Sir James Gordon, he considered it only fair that he should not only be restored to the active list, but he urged upon the Admiralty the justice of appointing him an Admiral of the Fleet.

MR. CHILDERS

said, it appeared to him that the Committee had wandered a little from the subject of the clause under consideration. It was the wish of the Admiralty to do every justice to these gallant officers alluded to; at the same time it must be remembered that what they now asked was not a claim founded upon justice, but a been of considerable importance. After the Act passed these officers would be in the same position as now, except that they would have nothing to do. When the time came for the preparation of the necessary Orders in Council to carry the Act into effect the claims of the officers would be considered. On the real ques- tion of the clause, the case was this. When a pensioner went into the Hospital his out-pension ceased; when he left the Hospital the pensions revived. By the present Bill, inducements would be offered to the in-pensioners to become out-pensioners, which they had no power to do at present; and the result would be a call for an additional charge on the Votes of the House. This additional charge would be repaid from the Hospital funds.

MR. LIDDELL

said, that finding the feeling of the Committee was against him, he would give way; but he would renew his Motion on the Report.

Amendment withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

MR. CHILDERS

stated that, after the Division on the Motion of his gallant Friend the Member for Wakefield (Sir John Hay), although the Admiralty were not prepared to admit the clause for retaining a Governor with the present power and position, they were prepared to introduce a clause which would give power to the Admiralty to appoint, after the death of the present Governor, an officer, not under the rank of Vice Admiral, as Visitor and Governor, to perform such duties as might be thought expedient, and he would receive a salary of £1,000 a year. The hon. Member moved to insert a clause to that effect.

MR. LIDDELL

asked, was the office to be ornamental?

MR. CHILDERS

replied, that it would be as nearly as possible honorary; and it would not interfere with the office of Captain Superintendent.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT

expressed his gratification at this concession on the part of the Admiralty. It was most desirable that the Hospital should be presided over by a meritorious and distinguished officer. It gave eclat to the service both at home and abroad.

Clause added to the Bill.

MR. CORRY

asked, how the large range of buildings which would become vacant under the operation of this Bill were to he disposed of?

MR. CHILDERS

replied, that up to the present time no decision had been arrived at on the point.

MR. HENLEY

wished to offer his protest against the way in which this Bill had been smuggled through the House. He was in the House that morning up to a quarter past two o'clock, and he had certainly heard no intimation given that this Bill would be taken at a morning sitting to-day. He protested against such a course of proceeding.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he was sorry that the right hon. Gentleman had not been informed of the intentions of the Government with regard to this Bill. He was not aware that the right hon. Gentleman took any special interest in the Bill or he should certainly have felt it his duty to inform him. He had informed the gallant Gentleman the Member for Dublin County who was understood to be the usual channel of communication in such matters, and those who were known to take an interest in naval matters were, he believed, well aware that the measure would not be brought forward last night, but would be taken at that morning's sitting.

MR. HENLEY

must say that, as a principle, it was not fair to fix a morning sitting without giving due public notice of the fact, particularly after so very late a sitting as that of last night.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

concurred in the observations of his right hon. Friend. The course taken by the Government in respect to this measure was extremely inconvenient, particularly to the constituencies in naval dockyards, and other such establishments, some of which he had the honour of representing. Had he known last night that this Bill would be taken at twelve o'clock to-day, he should certainly have felt it his duty to watch it more narnowly than he was able to do from the brief notice which he received. It appeared to him that this was a most unfair way to press a Bill through the House in so thin a House, and when even the Treasury Bench was almost deserted. His right hon. Friend was perfectly justified in sharply rebuking the Admiralty for their conduct in this matter.

MR. LIDDELL

suggested that as hon. Members generally were taken by surprise in this matter, it would be only fair of the Government to fix such a day for the bringing up of the Report as would afford them an ample opportunity of expressing their opinions upon the measure generally.

MR. ALDERMAN SALOMONS

said, he was about making a similar request.

MR. CHILDERS

said, he was most desirous of meeting the wishes of hon. Members, and would fix Thursday formally for the bringing up of the Report; but on that day he would name such a day for the further stage of the Bill as would, he hoped, meet the con Venience of Members generally.

MR. HENLEY

warned the Government that if they endeavoured to push measures forward in the way they had done the present Bill they would find they would lose time, instead of gaining it, inasmuch as the Members generally would avail themselves of all the forms of the House to delay their proceedings, and would find plenty of opportunities for throwing obstacles in the way of the Government.

Preamble agreed to.

House resumed.

Bill reported; as amended, to be considered on Thursday.