NAVY ESTIMATES, 1896–7. (Hansard, 12 March 1896)

SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLE WORTH (Lancashire, Clitheroe)
said he thought the time had now come when the Government might again make some proposal. 858 [Ministerial cries of "No," and Irish cries of "Go on."] This was a very large Vote of nearly 4½ millions. Some of the Dockyard Members wanted to raise questions upon it, which were of interest to their constituents. His hon. Friend the Member for East Mayo desired to raise the question of chaplains in the Navy, and such a question as that could not be debated at that hour (four o'clock) of the morning. He would suggest that the Debate should be taken on the Report of this Vote, and should be fixed for a reasonable hour this day or on Monday. Was it reasonable that the Government should attempt to force this Vote, which involved no less than 4½ millions of money, through the Committee at Four o'clock in the morning.

MR. T. M. HEALY
hoped that the Government would see how unadvisable it was for them to proceed with this Vote, which involved so large a sum, at that late hour. Hon. Members below the Gangway opposite appeared to think that the more rapidly they voted away money the better. As the Government had got all the Supplementary Estimates they might well postpone the further discussion of this Vote.

§ MR. W. REDMOND
said, that he had refrained from moving several of the Amendments that he had placed upon the Paper in order not to occupy the attention of the Committee unduly. If hon. Members opposite wished really to sit up, he was able and ready to sit up too.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY
said, the right hon. Gentleman opposite had referred to an offer that was made by the Government two hours ago, with the object of rendering it unnecessary that the House should sit up to a late hour. It had been said by hon. Members opposite that it was improper that the Government should press for this Vote which involved so large an amount of money at that late hour of the morning. But the right hon. Gentleman's memory must have failed him, because the discussion which usually took place on Vote 1 had already taken place on Vote A, and it was not usual to have a general discussion on both Votes. The Government had waited until past Four o'clock in the morning, 859 and the discussion had belter be brought to a conclusion.

SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH
said that if the right hon. Gentleman would refer back to what took place last Session, he would find that after the general discussion on Vote A, the Opposition did not allow any further Vote to be taken that night, and there, was a discussion, on Vote 1 on a subsequent morning.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY
said he was not referring to last Session. He was speaking of the general practice of the House. He was not at all anxious to unduly restrain liberty of Debate, and he would offer another proposal so that they might separate now and go quietly home to bed. If they got the Vote without discussion now, he would adjourn the Debate on the Army Estimates soon after ten to-morrow night and suspend the 12 o'clock Rule, and then this discussion could be continued as long as the House chose to sit upon the report of the Supplementary Estimate. He saw no reason why they should not come to a definite arrangement of that sort.

§ MR. KEARLEY
said that the right hon. Gentleman's proposal was, that having endured all this labour they were to resume the discussion at 10 o'clock tomorrow night. He would very much prefer to discuss the Vote completely now. On the general discussion the First Lord of the Admiralty had promised to give some explanation on a matter he had put to him. He had asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he would be in a position when Vote 1 was under discussion to give some of the details of his scheme with regard to warrant officers. There were one or two details he would like to raise now. The right hon Gentleman would remember that the question of the abolition of harbour pay had been pressed forward by the warrant officers. The result of the present system was that their scale of pay was reduced by 1s. to 2s. 6d. a day; and, as the course extended over several months, these men suffered considerable pecuniary loss. He should be glad to know whether anything was going to be done to remove this ground of complaint. It was unfair that this reduction should take place. Commissioned officers in the 860 receipt of half pay were put on full pay while they were attending the gunnery or torpedo school. Why, then, should the pay of warrant officers be reduced in similar cases? Under the new scheme he understood that the pay of warrant officers was to commence at 5s. 6d. a day. This, he suggested, ought only to apply to probationers for warrant rank, and that, when they were confirmed in that rank, they should start on a minimum pay of 6s. a day. But it was the question of rank that chiefly exercised the minds of warrant officers. They desired greatly to have fleet rank granted to them, and he hoped that their aspirations in that direction would be favourably considered. If they were not, he feared that the agitation which had been going on in this matter would be continued. Another point awaiting settlement was the demand of the engine-room artificers to have warrant rank. The attention of the First Lord of the Admiralty had been called to this question by a deputation that waited upon him. There was a small question affecting the Marines which he had promised to bring forward. Route marching, of course, put a considerable strain upon men's shoe leather; but a Marine was only allowed one pair of boots in the year, whereas a soldier of the line was given two pairs, and it was contended that he ought to have three. The armourer-sergeants in the Royal Marines had also a grievance. Formerly there was an equality of rank and pay between them and armourer-sergeants in the Army, but in June 1883, the position of the latter was improved. As armourer sergeants in the Marines had to do the same work, to possess the same qualifications, and to pass the same examinations as armourer-sergeants in the Army, he did not understand why a distinction was made between them in respect of rank and pay.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY
said, he would give the hon. Gentleman an answer with reference to the boots of the Marines that evening. Without notice he was not able to deal with the points mentioned, but he would look into the question. As to the warrant officers, he reminded the hon. Member that the total monetary concessions made amounted to £30,000 which he hoped would show that the Government had approached the matter 861 in a liberal spirit and with a desire to redress grievances. Those officers engaged in the harbour ships were being raised from the inferior scale to a higher scale, as for instance the amount for those under five years had been raised from 7s. 3d. a day to 9s. It would be most convenient, however, to have a printed statement in the shape of a Parliamentary paper or an Order in Council, which would give a better idea to all hon. Members who took an interest in the question than any statement he could make at present.

§ MR. KEARLEY
What about warrant officers' rank for the engine-room artificers?

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY
said that as regarded warrant rank there were a good many difficulties connected with cabin accommodation and other arrangements in the ship. The matter was one he wished further to examine into before coming to a final conclusion.

§ MR. KEARLEY
said, the artificers quite recognised the difficulty, and had no expectation of getting separate cabin accommodation. They would be satisfied with getting warrant rank.

§ MR. E. J. C. MORTON,
reverting to the warrant officers again, said, their main ambition was that they should have a line of promotion open to them similar to the quartermasters' line in the Army and the Marines. He had never been able to understand why such a line of promotion should not be given. Every retired Naval officer who was a Member of the last Parliament was in favour of it, and he believed the same was true of this Parliament. By process of exhaustion he gathered that the only people who were against it were the Naval Lords. It was a matter of importance to the Navy to offer every inducement to the mm to rejoin for a second term of service in greater numbers than at present. Tlie complaint of these men was that no prospect of promotion was open to them. He knew an actual case of a warrant officer who, while warrant officer, had under his command a non-commissioned officer in the Marines. Now that noncommissioned officer was a captain, and had rank over the head of the warrant officer who once commanded him, and that captain of Marines had an appoint- 862 ment worth more than £400 a year, whereas the warrant officer was doomed to remain in his original position, having less than half the salary of his former subordinate. This was a point of great importance from the point of view of the efficiency of the Navy as a whole; and he hoped the time was not far distant when promotion might be analogous in the Navy to that in the Army and in the Marines. Of course, he recognised that the right hon. Gentleman had done more for the warrant officers than any of his predecessors had done, and he possessed letters from warrant officers bearing testimony to that fact. He hoped, however, that the Government, before going out of Office, would do something in the direction he had suggested.

§ MR. DILLON
said that, three hours and a half ago, the Chairman of Committees refused to put a Motion to report progress, because he held that the House, having determined to suspend the 12 o'clock Rule, intended that the Committee should sit for some fair period of time after 12 o'clock. They had now, in his opinion, been sitting for that fail-period, and had had a prolonged Debate, and it must be clear to every fair-minded Member of the Committee that it was neither right nor reasonable that they should be asked to discuss important matters at that hour in the morning. He intended moving an important Amendment, and it was a matter which he was entitled to discuss at a time when there was some chance of the proceedings being reported. No doubt it would be convenient to Members of the Government to have the discussion at that moment; but, as it was not reasonable to continue a Debate at that period of the morning on an old and long-standing grievance, he was obliged to move to report progress.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY
said, he hoped the hon. Member for East Mayo would not press the Motion. An arrangement was offered by the Government some time since with a view to meet the wishes of the hon. Member, and the Government had no desire or intention to prevent the hon. Member expressing his views on the question to which he referred. They were quite willing to proceed with the discussion, but as the hon. Member had 863 declined to accept the arrangements which were made some time ago, and had chosen to take his own course, he could scarcely hope to induce the Government to assent to the Motion to report progress. The hon. Member would have an opportunity of bringing forward the question in which he was interested on Report, and which it must be admitted was a matter of considerable importance.

MR. T. M. HEALY
said, he thought they had been treated in a very inconsiderate manner throughout the night, especially as the Government had had no reason to complain of the action taken by hon. Members on the opposite side of the House. The suggestion of the hon. Member for Mayo was that the Navy Vote raised this question of Catholic chaplains. This was a question that was raised so far back as 1878 or 1879. They then got a number of pledges on the matter, but they had not been kept; and now, when a largo increase of the Vote was asked for in connection with the Navy, the hon. Gentleman desired to raise the question, as to these pledges and the efficacy of them, and what was to be done in regard to them. What they claimed was that, in the case of a matter specially affecting Ireland, it was unreasonable to ask them to discuss it at this time of night. The Government had a long Session before them. They met at an unusually late period, but that was not their fault. The date of the Meeting of Parliament was the Government's own action, and the date of the Adjournment would be their own action. The Irish Members would be prepared to sit in September—they had no grouse to shoot. When they asked for the loyalty of Irish soldiers and Irish sailors, the least they might expect was that they should have the opportunity of having the advantage of those religious consolations which they gave to their own Church of England and Methodist people. He thought the time had arrived when they might fairly report progress.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY
said, it was quite impossible for the Government to assent to a Motion which would prevent them getting the Vote to-night. He had unsuccessfully 864 made various suggestions from time to time to-night, but they had met with a scanty response from hon. Gentlemen opposite. But even now he was not discouraged, in spite of the fate of his first two suggestions. He would now make a third suggestion. As the hon. Gentleman interested in the dockyard question did not wish to discuss it to-morrow, and as he recognised it was desirable that the hon. Member for East Mayo should say what he had to say on the subject of Roman Catholic chaplains in the Navy at a time when he could be reported, he would suggest that they should adjourn the other matters at 11 o'clock to-morrow night, which would give the hon. Gentleman a full opportunity for laying his case before the House and of being reported in the newspapers. The 12 o'clock Rale would be suspended, so that the discussion would not be stopped at midnight.

§ DR. TANNER
pointed out that the speeches of the two hon. Gentlemen who had spoken on the question of the dockyards had been very much condensed in consequence of the assurance of the right hon. Gentleman that they would have an opportunity of raising the matter again on the Report stage. Hon. Members on his side had been willing to meet the First Lord of the Treasury in a spirit of concession, but the acrimonious speech of the Colonial Secretary had been responsible for bringing on a long discussion that might otherwise have been avoided. Again, he desired to state that, on the Supplementary Navy Estimates, owing to a misconception, five or six Members had been absolutely shut out from moving or speaking to certain Amendments, as they thought Section 2 was going to be put from the Chair, whereas it was really Section 3, dealing with Naval Contracts, that was so put. If the First Lord of the Treasury would bring on the Report at the beginning of business on Monday, and allow two hours for it, they might allow the Vote to be taken at once.

§ MR. HERBERT LEWIS
asked whether, if the proposed arrangement were entered into, other questions besides those now named could be discussed?

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY
said that would rest with the Speaker.

§ MR. W. ALLEN (Newcastle-under-Lyme)
pressed for a reply to the suggestion of the hon. Member for East Mayo.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY
said he would do his best so far as matters rested with the Government to give a full hour before midnight.

§ MR. WEIR
said he was distinctly disappointed with the First Lord of the Treasury, who was a Scotchman. He asked the right hon. Gentleman two hours ago whether he was going to give a short half hour to Scotland, and he had not replied. He had no desire to occupy time, and only regretted the Government had not started business a week or a month earlier, and thus prevented them working all hours of the night. The discussions about two hours here and two hours there were a great waste of time. It would be far better to go right on and not play with time. He had a matter connected with the Highlands of Scotland—not a training ship—that he would deal with on Report, but now he wished to refer to the Coastguard. Whilst he had the greatest sympathy with the Irish Members and their dockyard treatment he must have some sympathy for his unfortunate constituents, who had received very little attention from the Government, and he sincerely hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give the Committee some assurance that Scotland and the Highlands especially would have some kind of recognition.

MR. T. M. HEALY
said that good humour had characterised the proceedings even during the Chairman's short absence, but there was one observation which the First Lord of the Treasury had made which was peculiar. They had sat up to-night to assist the Government in getting Votes, and the reward the right hon. Gentleman offered them was that if they had dispersed two or three hours ago they should begin discussion to-morrow night at ten o'clock. In other words, for entering upon a two or three hours discussion to-night, they were to lose to-morrow night for the discussion of other subjects. What had occurred was unavoidable on their part. 866 The dockyard Members got through their discussion, and he and his friends had to sit and listen. That was surely no reason why they should lose their opportunity of discussion to-morrow night. He suggested that the right hon. Gentleman should get back to ten o'clock, and that he should have his Vote.

§ MR. W. REDMOND
said he was not so much interested in the Vote as the right hon. Member for East Mayo; but he was quite prepared, if the right hon. Gentleman wished, he should move the Amendment of which he had given, notice. [Cries of "Go on!"]

§ MR. MACNEILL
said he was a man of peace. He had not intervened in the discussion, though he had watched it with what his Friend the late Mr. Biggar used to call, an intelligent interest. He assured the right hon. Gentleman that for his own sake he would do well to make the concession asked of him.

§ MR. WEIR
said the right hon. Gentleman had given no intimation that even five minutes would be given to Scotland. The better plan, in his opinion, would be to go on with the business, and if the course were clear, he would be glad to commence operations with the Amendment which stood in his name.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY
reminded the House how the matter stood as regards Army Estimates. The first Amendment to the Motion that the Speaker leave the Chair was in the name of the hon. Member for Northampton. He thought they ought to dispose of that before they began the discussion on the Report of Supply. He was ready, therefore, to maks this pledge, that if they could take the discussion on the Amendment at an earlier hour than eleven o'clock, he would immediately afterwards move to adjourn the Debate and begin Report of Supply.

§ MR. DALZIEL
thought the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman ought to receive consideration. He did not think the Motion of the hon. Member for Northampton, was likely to occupy anything like the time which the right hon. Gentleman seemed to anticipate. There was every possibility that it would be disposed of by the dinner hour, or 867 immediately afterwards. He should, therefore, advise his hon. Friend to accept the offer now made by the Leader of the House.

§ MR. DILLON
said he recognised that to a certain extent he was in the right hon. Gentleman's power. That being so, he was disposed to accept the offer. He asked leave to withdraw his Motion.