MOTION FOR A COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 27 July 1874)

§ SIR JOHN HAY
, in rising to call attention to the case of Commander J. P. Cheyne, R.N., and to move— That this House will, upon Monday next, resolve itself into a Committee to consider of an humble Address to Her Majesty praying Her Majesty that She will be graciously pleased to direct that the Pension of £200 a-year awarded to the said John Powles Cheyne be paid to him, in addition to his retired pay, without deduction, for the term of his natural life, and to assure Her Majesty that this House will make good the same, 765 said, it was a subject which he had on a former occasion introduced to the notice of the House, and which had been before them by Petition. Commander Cheyne was an officer of considerable merit and distinction, who, after having served for a considerable period, and on three occasions in the Arctic expeditions, was appointed to the Simoom, one of Her Majesty's troop-ships on Indian service. His services in the Arctic regions had been so considerable that promises of promotion were held out to him. He was the first lieutenant of the Simoom during the period of the necessary hurrying out of troops to India at the time of the Mutiny. Whilst engaged in this service, which he performed with great credit to himself and advantage to his profession, Commander Cheyne, when off the Cape of Good Hope, in the attempt to save a man's life, received a severe blow upon the head, which fractured his skull and otherwise seriously injured him. His career was thus cut short, and he returned to England in impaired health. The Duke of Somerset, who was then First Lord of the Admiralty, with great kindness appointed Commander (then Lieutenant) Cheyne to the guardship at Portsmouth, for the purpose of training boys. The noble Duke stated that his condition of health was such that it would be improper to promote him, but that he might render good service in the position in which he had placed him. Commander Cheyne continued to render good service there for some time, until the officers at Portsmouth under whom he acted, again recommended him for promotion. The Duke of Somerset recognizing the great suffering which he (Commander Cheyne) had endured from his wound, and his great merit as an officer, and looking at the small number of officers that he could promote, together with the fact that the medical officers had pointed out that it was impossible he could serve in the Tropics, in consequence of his serious wound, appointed him as one of the lieutenants of Plymouth Hospital for the period of his natural life. Some doubt had since existed as to whether that appointment was for life or not, although the Duke of Somerset recognized the fact in certain correspondence, as would be seen by the Returns laid on the Table of the House by the late First Lord of the 766 Admiralty. It would be seen that he was appointed to succeed an officer who died at the age of 78, and there was no doubt that in 1863 the officers appointed to the lieutenancies of Plymouth Hospital were continued in this service for the period of their lives. This office gave Commander Cheyne the pay of a lieutenant of the Navy of £127 15s. a-year, and, in addition, his pay as a lieutenant of Plymouth Hospital was £200, making £327 a-year, together with a house partly furnished. In the year 1860, the Duke of Somerset being still at the Admiralty, a new regulation was passed, by which the lieutenants of the hospitals were to be retired at the age of 55; but that was not to apply, so far as Commander Cheyne was aware, to his particular case, and there was no intimation made to him that he was to be deprived of the office, which included a pension for the wound he had received. In 1869 considerable reductions were made in the Navy expenditure, and Commander Cheyne was retired from the position he occupied in the hospital. He lost his house and the duty he had to perform, but compensation was given to him of £200 a-year, which, however, was to cease on his attaining the age of 55. That was the particular part of the case to which he (Sir John Hay) wished to draw the attention of the House. This gentleman had received no pension for his wound, whereas the usual regulation was, that a person who was wounded in the service received a pension for life. Instead of that pension, he was appointed to a sort of sinecure, or light duty, for a permanency, as it was understood, but when he was deprived of the office, the pension was only given to him until the age of 55. It would be seen that that arrangement prevented him from making any proper provision for his family by insuring or by any other process, as he would have been able to do had his income been for life. When he was dismissed from the hospital in October, 1869, he appealed to the Duke of Somerset, to ascertain how it was that he was so dismissed, and there were four letters of the noble Duke now on the Table of the House, in all of which he, as First Lord of the Admiralty, asserted that Commander Cheyne was right in his view of the case, and that he had a right to receive proper compensation, as he (the 767 noble Duke) had intended that he should continue in the office of lieutenant of the hospital for life. The Duke of Somerset's letters extended to the 4th of June of the present year, in one of which he said— I shall be glad if the Admiralty can do something for you, in compensation for the loss of the appointment, which appeared at the time the best thing I could do for you. If any application is made to me, I shall he ready to state all I know of your case to the Board of Admiralty. In addition to the fact that a pension had only been given to Commander Cheyne until the age of 55, this also had happened to this unfortunate officer. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Pontefract, then First Lord of the Admiralty, on the 4th of March, 1870, when the subject was brought before the House, having stated the figures he (Sir John Hay) had already quoted, stated that Commander Cheyne would come off very well under the now retiring arrangement. But what happened immediately after that? Commander Cheyne was retired as a commander, and so promoted; but, instead of getting a benefit from that arrangement, the pension was reduced by the amount of the pay. He had £200 a-year pension, which was increased by £100, but that was reduced by £120, so that he now had a pay of £275 a-year for life and a pension of £80 2s. 6d., which would stop at the age of 55. The matter had been brought before the House on several occasions. The late Mr. Corry, who was First Lord of the Admiralty, took a very strong view of this case, as also did Lord Hampton, and every person who had investigated it with impartiality must see that Commander Cheyne had been extremely unfortunate in having received no pension for his wound. Two other officers were stated to be placed on the same footing as Commander Cheyne, but with this difference, that they were not wounded officers, whereas Commander Cheyne was hardly capable of doing anything for himself. He (Sir John Hay) should be sorry to detain the House on a question of this kind. He regretted that neither his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty nor the Secretary of the Admiralty were present to state their views on the question, and would conclude by moving the Resolution of which he had given Notice.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he could assure his right hon. and gallant Friend and the House, that the Government exceedingly regretted that the First Lord of the Admiralty and the Secretary to the Admiralty were not present. They were absent on official business at Portsmouth, and the uncertainty attaching to the progress of Public Business in the House rendered it impossible for them to anticipate when the Motion would be reached. Not having himself paid any special attention to the matter, he was unwilling to express any opinion on the merits of the case in the absence of those better acquainted with it, and he therefore hoped the right hon. and gallant Baronet would be satisfied with a promise on the part of the Government, that they would consult the First Lord of the Admiralty, and that the case should receive candid and careful consideration. While the circumstances stated in a case of the kind, relating as it did to a matter of pension, might appear to constitute a strong claim upon the liberality, and even the justice, of the Government, yet those circumstances were often so complicated, and so much affected by the decisions taken in other cases more or loss similar, that it would be rash in any one to pronounce an opinion off-hand. Certainly, the authorities to whom the right hon. and gallant Baronet had referred were such as to render it due to the gallant officer that the case should be carefully considered, and the right hon. and gallant Baronet might rely upon that being done.

§ SIR JOHN HAY
said, if his right hon. Friend the Secretary for War, who sat next the Chancellor of the Exchequer, were consulted, he would be able 769 to explain his views of the case—views which no doubt would be shared by his Colleagues. He trusted that this blot on our naval administration would be removed before long.

§ MR. HUNT
explained that he had not been present to reply to his right hon. and gallant Friend (Sir John Hay) on the subject, in consequence of his having been under the impression that the question was not to be brought forward that evening. He wished to state that his absence was not from any want of courtesy either towards his right hon. and gallant Friend, or the gallant officer in question.