§ 58. Mr. BARNES
asked the amount received by the Admiralty from the contractors for services rendered by naval ratings on the trial trip of His Majesty's ship "Monarch"; and if the amount in question was equal to the amount which would have been paid by the contractor to his men on the special rates agreed to for such trip?
§ 60 and 61. Mr. HUDSON
asked (1) the amount of the rebate on the contract price of His Majesty's ship "Monarch" received by the Admiralty for work done by naval ratings in place of contractors' workmen when the final acceptance trials were run from the Tyne to Devonport; and (2) what amount of money was saved to the contractor by the Admiralty allowing naval ratings to work the acceptance trials in place of contractors' men on His Majesty's ship "Monarch"?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara)
As I have already stated, to meet Service requirements in the matter of economising coal, and for purposes of expedition, the acceptance trial was carried out during the passage of the ship to Devonport. If the ordinary procedure had been followed, the vessel would have carried out the trial off the mouth of the Tyne, and would have returned to discharge contractors' workmen. In any case, naval stokers would have been provided for working the boilers. The naval ratings—already drafted to the ship—were requisitioned for attendance on the engines, otherwise the Admiralty would have had to bear the expense of returning the contractors' workmen from Devonport to Newcastle. The departures from the contract involved some extra payments and some rebates, the net result being a rebate of £220. The amount of this rebate directly due to the employment of naval ratings in lieu of civilian engine attendants was not definitely stated in the rebate offered; but when the rebate offered was received it was checked by our own estimates, which covered allowances and messing on the usual scale.
§ Lord C. BERESFORD
Would it be possible to put these naval ratings on cheque as extra pay for doing work for other men which other men ought to do?
§ Dr. MACNAMARA
I am afraid I cannot accept that. It would establish a rather important precedent. Naval ratings 1049 are detailed for certain duties, and they do that duty. But I do not think I can accept the novel suggestion to give them a special allowance, because they simply carried out the duty for which they were detailed.