§ LORD BROUGHAM rose, in performance of an act of justice, to state, that upon further inquiry he was satisfied that he ought not to have made the observations which he recently had made (Feb. 5, p. 332), on the case of Lieutenant Graham and Mr. Elliott on the one side, and on that of Commander Pitman on the other. The facts which had since come to his knowledge would have prevented him from bearing such testimony as he had given to the characters of Lieutenant Graham and Mr. Elliott; whilst, on the other hand, they had convinced him that Commander Pitman did not deserve the opprobrium which he had cast upon that officer. The testimonies which he had received in favour of Lieutenant Graham and Mr. Elliott, which came from an officer whose judgment was as high as his testimony, was unexceptionable, and from an almost endless number of other officers. He had, however, since received another account from equally high authorities, and he could only account for the great discrepancy between them by supposing that the former must have related to their conduct at a period of their lives when they had not become guilty of the irregularities by which they had subsequently rendered themselves notorious; whilst, on behalf of Commander Pitman, he must say that the terms of approbation in which his general conduct was mentioned, induced him to believe that if the court-martial upon him had been postponed to a later period, he would never have been found guilty of the charges preferred against him. There was, however, this difference in the sentence passed upon these officers. Lieutenant Graham and Mr. Elliott were sentenced to be dismissed the service, and 1323 were declared incapable of serving Her Majesty in any capacity whatsoever. Commander Pitman was simply dismissed the service, but without the stigma of being incapable of serving Her Majesty.
The EARL of MINTOwould be sorry to say anything which should add to the pain which Messrs. Graham and Elliott must feel, while suffering under a very severe and well-merited punishment; but he must say that the officers serving on board that ship were of opinion that it was to be regretted Mr. Pitman had not called exculpatory evidence. It was to be regretted that the noble and learned Lord had drawn the attention of their Lordships to the subject. He must say that the bringing of the proceedings of courts-martial before Parliament had a serious tendency to weaken the good discipline of the naval service.
LORD BROUGHAMdenied that he had fallen into any error. He had done merely an act of justice which any one of their Lordships would have been equally bound to do upon similar information. And he now merely stated that he had received additional information which, had he received it before he made the former statement, would have prevented his laying it before their Lordships. As to his noble Friend's regret, he would have to suffer a great many more regrets from similar causes if he lived much longer.
The EARL of MINTOrepeated, that he regretted the noble Lord had brought forward those matters unnecessarily. He could easily have ascertained the precise facts had he made application to the heads of the Admiralty department.