§ SIR WILLIAM CROSSMAN (Portsmouth)asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is the fact, as stated in a letter written by Mr. Armit to the Under Secretary of State for War, dated 26th July last, and published in The Admiralty and Horse Guards Gazette of the 31st July, that certain officials connected with the Ordnance Department were, at the time of their connection with the Public Service, shareholders in a firm of contractors for the manufacture of ordnance; and, if such was the case, whether the Government have issued such instructions as will prevent the recurrence of such a state of affairs?
§ COLONEL HUGHES-HALLETT (Rochester)asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether Sir William Armstrong and Captain Andrew Noble, C.B., both directors and very large shareholders in "Armstrong, Mitchell, and Company," the Government Contractors for Ordnance, are or have been "associated" members of the Ordnance Committee on the Committee appointed to inquire into and report upon the cause of the bursting of the 43-ton gun on board H.M.S. Collingwood; whether Sir Frederick Abel, the Chemist to the War Department, is not a member of the Ordnance Committee, and at the same time a shareholder to a considerable extent in the said "Armstrong, Mitchell, and Company;" and, whether General Sir Frederick Campbell, R.A., late Director of Artillery and Stores, was not at one time also a shareholder in "Armstrong, Mitchell, and Company," while holding an official appointment under Government?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)In reply to the Question of the hon. and gallant Member for Portsmouth (Sir William Crossman), and also to that of the hon. and gallant Member for Rochester (Colonel Hughes Hallett), have to state that Sir William Armstrong and Captain A. Noble, C.B., and also Mr. Gledhill, of Sir Joseph Whitworth and Co., have been associated with the Ordnance Committee for the special inquiry into the cause of the bursting of the gun on board Her Majesty's ship Collingwood, which was made at Woolwich. Sir William Armstrong and Captain Noble and Mr. Leece (of 374 Sir Joseph Whitworth's firm) were requested in February, 1885, by the Secretary of State to act as associate members of the Ordnance Committee on the construction of ordnance. They are not ordinary members of the Ordnance Committee, and only sat on occasions when, by the direction of the Secretary of State, they were especially requested to do so. Sir Frederick Abel is not a regular member of the Ordnance Committee, but is associated therewith for inquiries connected with explosives. He was also associated with the Committee for the special inquiry above mentioned. He is, I am informed, a shareholder in Sir William Armstrong, Mitchell, and Co. As regards Sir Frederick Campbell, I have no information at hand which will enable me to state whether he was or was not a shareholder in the Company named at the time he was employed at the War Office; but, if necessary, I can inquire. I can only repeat what I said yesterday—that if any hon. Member or any other person in or out of this House has any charge whatever to bring against any member of the Ordnance Department, or any other officer serving in the War Office, I shall be glad to receive it, and I will undertake that it shall receive the due consideration of the Law Officers of the Crown. I again repeat that a tribunal competent to adjudicate upon it shall be found.
§ SIR WILLIAM CROSSMANAllow me to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that he has not answered the latter part of my Question—namely, whether there are any regulations to prevent members connected with the Ordnance Committee from holding partnerships in firms having ordnance contracts?
MR., W. H. SMITHI really am not able to say that any officer is not at liberty to invest his money in any Company he may think fit. But he is not at liberty to use any power which he possesses for his own personal advantage or for the advantage of any Company with with he is connected. I think the hon. and gallant Member will see that it would be utterly out of the power of any Secretary of State—and, indeed, he has no authority to do so—to lay down any regulations as to the investment of the private property of any officer serving the Crown.