Lords Sitting of 27 February 1855

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Consolidated Fund (£3,300,000); Consolidated Fund (£20,000,000).
ROYAL ASSENT.—Army Service Act Amendment.

THE COMMAND OF THE TURKISH LEVIES—GENERAL VIVIAN—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: My Lords, I have given notice to the noble Lord the Minister of War of my intention to put a question relative to the appointment of Major General Vivian, of the Madras army, to the command of the Turkish levies; and also a question relative to the appointment of some officers of reputation and experience to proceed to the Crimea, to inspect the state of affairs there, and to report thereon to the Government. I wish to know whether there will be any objection on the part of the noble Lord to lay a statement of the war services of Major General Vivian before the House. When an officer receives an annual gratuity of 100 l. a statement of his war services is invariably printed in the Army Estimates; and if it is important that it should be known what are the war services of an officer in such case, how much more important is it that they should be known when an officer is appointed to form and command 20,000 men. I
1950
ask for this information because I have not been able to obtain it elsewhere. Let it not be supposed that I impugn the military character of Major General Vivian; I cannot do so, because of that military character I know nothing. He may be a very respectable officer—and he was respected in the Presidency of Madras, or he would not have been appointed adjutant general of the Madras army. He may have conducted himself in this appointment in a business-like way, and he may be a very fit officer to appoint as adjutant general to the Turkish levy; but the question is, his fitness for the peculiar employment that has been given to him. I think your Lordships will agree that a force of this irregular character, composed of Asiatics, ought to be commanded by officers who have had experience of Orientals;—that appears to be the intention of Her Majesty's Government. I think your Lordships will admit that three qualifications are required in the officer appointed to such a command; he should have a high reputation in India, because, in consequence of that reputation, more officers will be willing to serve with him, and therefore his sphere of selection or recommendation would be increased; and he should, besides, have been placed in a position in which he has had an opportunity of becoming personally acquainted with officers the most fitted for the appointments he may have to confer or recommend officers for; he should also have had personal experience in the management of irregular corps, which differ entirely from those composing the regular army. Now, this officer, appointed to the Turkish levy, has not had the good fortune to receive the honour of being made a Companion of the Bath, and, considering the great liberality with which this order has been conferred on the Indian army, I think that circumstance is at once a clear proof that he has not had an opportunity of distinguishing himself in important actions. In point of fact, being in the Madras army, unless he had the good fortune of being selected for service with an irregular corps in the Affghan war, he could not have had an opportunity of witnessing any great operation of war since the Burmese war, which terminated in 1826, because in the war in Affghanistan, on the Sutlej, in Scinde, and on the Indus, the Madras army was not employed. Being an officer in the Madras army, he has not been placed in a position in which he could by any possibility know the men most fitted

1951
to be appointed to the Turkish force; such men are to be found in our irregular corps, and of the officers belonging to the irregular corps in India two-thirds belong to the Bengal army; out of 298 officers 210 are in the Bengal army, and the others are equally divided between the Madras and Bombay armies. Again, as this officer has been attached to the Presidency of Madras, and not employed in any capacity in an irregular corps, he has not had that experience in the management of an irregular force which is absolutely necessary to enable him to form and discipline the irregular corps forming the Turkish levy. There is a great difference between a regular and irregular corps. In the former there are many officers and a large establishment of non-commissioned officers, under whom discipline is carried out; but there are only two or three officers to the latter; and it is, therefore, absolutely necessary that the officer of an irregular corps should associate with the men, know them all, and exercise a moral ascendancy over them to an extent not required in the regular army. It therefore appears to me that this officer has the misfortune of being deficient in all three of the requisites which ought to be possessed by the individual appointed to the command of levies of this description. He cannot have a high military reputation, not having enjoyed the opportunity of acquiring one; he cannot have become acquainted with the persons most fitted to officer such troops; and he cannot have had that experience of an irregular corps which is absolutely necessary to qualify a man for this appointment. My Lords, the number of officers whom Major General Vivian will have to recommend, or upon whose appointment he will have to express an opinion, is very considerable. I have looked into this matter, and I think it is impossible that fewer than 125 officers, according to the lowest calculation, will be required for the disciplining of these 20,000 men. Now, where are these 125 officers to be found?—in this country? I have seen notices in the newspapers desiring them to make their applications, and I wish to know in what manner and by what person these appointments are to be made. If recourse is only to be had to officers on furlough, the number obtainable will be exceedingly small; and, besides, many of those officers are here on account of their health, and are, therefore, not the fittest to be selected for employment. I consider that the officer appointed
1952
to the command should have to recommend such officers as are fit among those who are at home, but that the Government should reserve to itself a discretionary power of acceding to or rejecting his recommendations. But, above all, a letter should be written to the Governor General of India, explaining to him the circumstances of the case, and desiring him to make known the necessities of the Government, and to recommend and send at once those officers who, in his opinion, are the fittest to hold these commands. Should this step have been taken, I think the best course that could have been pursued will have been adopted. But what I have been informed from, I believe, credible sources is, that, with the exception of the young officers who will do anything to enjoy the excitement of service, few will be disposed to serve in the Turkish force, unless their brevet rank, now extending only to India, should be extended to Europe. My Lords, that is an important question. I have at all times entertained the opinion that it was altogether contrary to public policy to confine the services of Indian officers to India alone. I have always considered that it was deserving of consideration whether the services of those officers should not be made available in this country and in every part of the world. The boon would be to them most grateful. It costs the State nothing. If they are not employed at all, it gives them only a right to that social position which the courtesy of society always now acknowledges, but which they desire to have established on a firmer and more regular footing; while, on the other hand, if their services should be required, the State can at once call for them, and they can be employed with great advantage to the public service. There can be no doubt that service in India is of a larger character, and tends more to open the minds of officers, than the ordinary service of the British army. I do not say that brigadiers to command British regiments ought to be taken from the Indian army, although brigadiers in the Indian army often command English regiments in India with credit and success; but in your staff, commissariat, and transport you can employ the services of Indian officers with whom the officers of the British army in Europe cannot compete. Those Indian officers have a more extensive and more valuable experience, and I have no doubt that in those particular branches of the military service in which it is asserted that great

1953
deficiencies have been observed, those deficiencies may to a very great extent be supplied by applying to the public service in Europe the ability and experience of officers who have served in the corresponding departments in India. My Lords, I have made these observations with reference to the appointment of Major General Vivian and that of other officers, because I feel deeply impressed with the conviction that the very first thing—the very life of the execution of all public affairs, consists in the judicious choice of agents, and that the greatest judgment is shown, and the greatest errors are committed, in the selection of the instruments by whom measures are to be carried out. We have at the very commencement of this great war lost the only army we have, and we have not in our military institutions the means of replacing it. We have lost it notwithstanding the most extraordinary efforts of courage and devotion on the part of our officers and men. There has, indeed, been glory, but there has been utter loss. The military reputation of the country has been impaired, not by any failure of the officers and soldiers, but in consequence of the want of men equal to the command of the army and the conduct of its various departments. It is my conviction that unless you can find the men by whom these disasters can be repaired, it will be impossible for you to re-establish our military reputation.
LORD PANMURE: My Lords, I cannot deny the right of the noble Earl to take the course he has just thought proper to follow; but I do deny the justice of that course as regards Major General Vivian, and its prudence as respects our whole army in the East. With reference to Major General Vivian, I can scarcely say that that officer has been yet appointed to command the Turkish contingent. I am in communication, however, with him, and, so far as my responsibility is concerned, I mean to select him for the command of those troops. I will do so, my Lords, from no personal acquaintance with this gallant officer, but because, after consulting those on whom I think I can rely in this matter, I have arrived at the conclusion that I am fully justified in intrusting to Major General Vivian the high and important command of the Turkish contingent which is to be raised under the convention just executed between Her Majesty and the Sultan. I think, my Lords, we require other qualifications on the part of an officer besides those of being a dashing officer and of having been
1954
engaged in glorious achievements with irregular cavalry or regiments of the line in India to fit him to organise such a Turkish force as we contemplate. It requires a man who is not only respected and looked up to in the service to which he belongs, but who also has filled such a position as Major General Vivian has long held with reputation in the Madras army, to warrant the expectation that he can organise a large body of troops, and, having organised them, to subdivide them as may be requisite into the different arms of the service. My Lords, Major General Vivian has filled the responsible post of adjutant general, as the noble Earl states, in the Madras army. In early life, while connected with the Indian army, no man in his position in the subaltern or inferior ranks of the army ever displayed more courage or a more gallant bearing on the plains of India, than did Major General Vivian; and in his capacity of adjutant general of the Madras army he so conducted himself in the disciplining of that army and its conduct that on his retirement he received from the General in command in that Presidency the very highest testimonials which I ever knew any man to obtain from another. He received from the civil authorities of that Presidency testimonials equally strong; and he received from the authorities at home likewise testimonials of which, as an officer, he may well be proud. My Lords, if I wanted anything to confirm me in the opinion I have formed of the character of Major General Vivian, and of his fitness for this service, it is the simple fact which I am about to mention. Since it has gone abroad that it was in contemplation to appoint Major General Vivian to the command of the Turkish contingent, applications upon applications have flowed in from officers connected with the Indian service, each of whom is more anxious than the other to be employed under this gallant officer. My Lords, the selection of an officer for so high a command as this, I am aware, is attended with no little responsibility. I feel that responsibility in this case; nevertheless, I am not disposed to shrink from it. But I put it to the noble Earl whether, when an officer has not been actually appointed, it is either fair towards him or just towards the service he is to be called on to administer, to cast, from the moment his name is mentioned to the public—I will not say a slur upon him—but doubts as to his fitness for the discharge of the duties about to be imposed upon him-

1955
The noble Earl has said that he doubts whether any but young officers will volunteer for service under General Vivian. To that assertion I am not able to make an answer, but this I can state, that it will be my duty to select the best officers I can find, of whatever grade they may be, and to give reward and employment to merit wherever that merit may present itself, allowing no personal considerations to interfere with the appointment of the best, most experienced, and most gallant officers whom the Indian army affords. No doubt the greater number of those officers at present at home on furlough will be the first to present themselves, but of course if a satisfactory selection cannot be made from them, the course referred to by the noble Earl will be adopted. Much valuable time, however, would be lost by resorting to this course at once, and therefore from among those who present themselves from the East India Company's service—than whom none better could be desired—from officers on half-pay of Her Majesty's service—nay, even from those who may have retired from the service whose abilities may recommend them for re-employment—I shall endeavour to make a selection of officers for this service. In every way it will be my desire to appoint officers to this contingent who will not only make it effective for the immediate service for which it is required, but who also will do their best to disseminate, through that portion of the Turkish army at least, the spirit, the order, and the gallantry of British troops—thereby conferring a temporary advantage on this country as well as on Turkey, and on Turkey herself a permanent good, by the new spirit and life which will be infused into her army. With reference to the other question on which the noble Earl slightly touched—whether it was the intention of the Government to appoint an officer to go to the Crimea to see and report on the state of affairs there—I have to answer that no such officer has been appointed, nor is it the present intention of Her Majesty's Government to appoint such an officer, but to wait and see the result of the steps already taken with reference to the staff in the Crimea. I was glad to hear that the noble Earl, in questioning this appointment of General Vivian, confined himself to the military fitness of that officer for such an appointment, bearing testimony at the same time, as I am sure every one must who knows him, to the worth of his personal character.
LORD VIVIAN: My Lords, I hope I may be permitted to say a few words in vindication of a gallant officer whom I have the honour to call my relative. I must say, my Lords, that I think it is rather hard that the noble Earl should—I will not say attack, but criticise the merits of a general officer, appointed to a particular service by the Executive, who are alone responsible for that appointment, in such a way as materially to damage the prestige of that officer, and to render him, perhaps, less useful for the service on which he is to be employed. As the noble Earl thinks he has a right to question General Vivian's capacity, because he has not received that reward for his services which it is for the Crown alone to bestow, I take leave to read to your Lordships the opinion of General Vivian's commanding officer on this point, in order that your Lordships and the public may see whether the selection of my gallant relative is a judicious one or not. The following is an extract from a letter to the Government authorities from the Commander in Chief of the Madras army when General Vivian resigned his office of Adjutant General:—
"Bangalore, August 29, 1853.
"But besides the requisite ability for the discharge of the duties of his department, Colonel Vivian possesses such eminent qualifications for active command that the Commander in Chief would feel himself wanting in his duty to the Government, to the Hon. the Court of Directors, as well as to the distinguished officer in question, did not his Excellency bring the subject thus prominently to notice, in the hope that, should Colonel Vivian return to India, early opportunity will be taken to select him for employment in such manner as may be most beneficial to the public service. There is not, in the Commander in Chief's opinion, in any army a more gallant soldier than Colonel Vivian. The record of his services contained in the accompanying general order of the Commander in Chief shows that he distinguished hinself in the field on every occasion on which he has had an opportunity of doing so. 'Many officers who have seen less service have (the Commander in Chief believes) been honoured with the approbation of their Sovereign; and, should the right hon. the Governor in Council participate in his Excellency's sentiments in regard to the Colonel's merits, Sir R. Armstrong doubts not that the home authorities will recommend to Her Majesty the recognition of Colonel Vivian's services.'"
General Vivian has also had the honour of being mentioned three times in public despatches. Whenever he has had the opportunity he has distinguished himself by gallant conduct in the field; and I do believe I am justified in saying that no more distinguished officer could have been

1957
found for this command. It is hardly necessary for me to say that I knew nothing whatever of the appointment of my gallant relative until it had been made known to the public in the public journals. The noble Earl says he does not think any officer of distinction would consent to serve under General Vivian; but I can only say to that, that two general officers, one of them a C.B., have offered themselves to serve under him, and many distinguished field officers are crowding in to offer their services. I must repeat, I think it most unjustifiable and most cruel to attack the prestige of an officer about to undertake a most arduous and responsible duty, and I do not think we are justified in taking such a course in this House. The Executive is responsible for the appointment of officers, and it is sufficient for us to interfere whenever an officer goes wrong and proves himself incompetent for his duty.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: The noble Lord has mistaken me on one point. I did not say that no officer of distinction would consent to serve under General Vivian. What I said was, that the more distinguished the officer appointed to command this contingent the more probable it was that officers of distinction would press forward to take service under him. With regard to the rest, I made no doubt but that General Vivian was a most respectable officer; that he had the respect of those who were acquainted with him was evident from the fact that he had held the office of Adjutant General of the Madras army, and I thought he would have done extremely well in a similar position in this contingent. What I questioned was his fitness for the peculiar appointment which has been conferred upon him.
LORD VIVIAN: I must venture to tell the noble Earl that higher military authorities than he have pronounced General Vivian to be an officer peculiarly fitted for command in the field. I am perfectly aware the noble Earl thinks himself able to command an army in the field, but I wish to point out to him that General Vivian's reputation has been stamped with the approval of those who have actually commanded armies in the field.

ROMAN CATHOLIC PROCESSIONS (IRELAND)—QUESTION.
LORD BERNERSasked whether the fact stated as to certain Roman Catholic
1958
ecclesiastics in Ireland having appeared publicly in their robes had been submitted to the law officers of the Crown with the view to ascertain its legality; and, if so, whether there was any objection to lay that opinion of those officers before the House? He also wished to know whether it was probable the Report of the Commissioners to inquire into the education given at Maynooth would shortly be laid before the House—and likewise whether it was true that a copy of the evidence taken before that Commission had been delivered to the Right Rev. Dr. Cullen?
EARL GRANVILLEwas understood to say that the law officers of the Crown had stated their opinion to be that the Act did not affect the secular or working clergy. With respect to the second question, not having had an opportunity of communicating with the noble Earl at the head of the Commission (the Earl of Harrowby) he was not in a position to answer it.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE BILL—COMMITTEE.
House in Committee (according to Order).
THE LORD CHANCELLORexplained the nature of the amendments he proposed to introduce into the measure. In the first place he proposed to reduce the amount for stealing property to the value of which persons might be tried summarily by the magistrates in petty sessions from 20 s. to 10 s. He proposed also to reduce the period of imprisonment that might be inflicted from one year to six months, and, in the case of a person pleading guilty to a larceny of greater value than 10 s., to one year instead of two years. He also proposed to enact that in no case should any summary conviction under this Act be attended with forfeiture. Exception having been taken to the Aldermen of the City of London being intrusted with the power of summary conviction, he had decided to omit them from the Bill, although the statistics certainly seemed to show that justice was at present by no means less efficiently administered by them than by the magistracy generally. He also proposed to give an option to the accused either to have their cases summarily adjudicated upon or to be dealt with in the usual manner.
LORD BROUGHAMexpressed his satisfaction generally at the amendments introduced into the Bill by his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack. To show the extensive operation which the Bill was

1959
likely to have, he might mention that in the year 1853 there were 21,000 committals for petty larceny, 12,500 of which were of offenders who had stolen property of a less value than 5s. Even, therefore, if the amount of property for stealing which a man could be summarily tried was limited to 5s., the Bill would probably be applicable in 12,500 cases in the course of a year. He was, however, very glad that the sum was fixed at 10 s. instead of 5s. With all possible respect for the Corporation of the City of London, of which he was a member, he must say that he did not think it was advisable to give the Lord Mayor or an Alderman, sitting alone, greater powers than were possessed by single magistrates generally, and it was, therefore, with great satisfaction that he heard from his noble and learned Friend that he did not intend to retain them in the clause by which power to convict summarily was given to polite and stipendiary magistrates.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, he was sorry that his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack had consented to limit the operation of the Bill to larcenies to a smaller value than 10 s., instead of extending it, as he had originally proposed, to 20 s. He was, on the other hand, glad that the maximum amount of imprisonment to be inflicted under the Bill was to be limited to one year, which he thought quite sufficient to be imposed without the intervention of a jury. He was glad also that the noble and learned Lord had given the option of a trial by jury; for had he not done so he must have opposed the Bill as unconstitutional. It was also with great satisfaction that he heard that the Lord Mayor and a sitting Alderman of the City of London were not to be included in the clause permitting certain single magistrates to exercise the summary jurisdiction given by this Bill. Entertaining as he did the highest possible respect for the Corporation of the City of London, he nevertheless could not admit that the Lord Mayor or an Alderman was equal to any other two justices throughout the country. The great fault that he found with the Bill introduced during the last Session of Parliament by his learned Friend the Recorder of London for abolishing grand juries at the Central Criminal Court, was, that it made one Alderman equal to twenty-three grand jurymen. The present Bill certainly did not carry aldermanic laudation so far; but he nevertheless thought that his noble and learned Friend had done wisely in striking
1960
the City magistracy out of the clause to which he was now referring.
LORD ST. LEONARDSexpressed his approbation that the amount of the value for stealing which a man might be punished summarily by the petty sessions had been reduced from 20 s. to 10 s., because he thought that if they had embraced all offences up to the former amount in the present measure, the result would have been to throw such an amount of business on the petty sessions as the magistracy—particularly in the rural districts—would have found themselves unable to dispose of. He thought also that a year's imprisonment, with hard labour, was quite a sufficient amount of punishment to be inflicted by magistrates at petty sessions without the intervention of a jury.
LORD BROUGHAMwished just to remind his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) that the clerks of the peace were differently paid in different counties, and he understood there was a considerable disposition on their part to oppose the measure. In some counties they were paid by salary, and in others by fees, but he hoped some measure would be taken to have them all paid by salary. So great was the variety of fees in different counties, that in one place the charge for discharging a recognisance was 12 s. 6d., and, in another, only 2s.
LORD CAMPBELLobserved, that in some counties a great many petty offences were tried, at considerable expense and inconvenience, before the judges of assize, and he thought that such cases might much more satisfactorily be disposed of by the magistrates at quarter sessions, or at intermediate sessions.
THE LORD CHANCELLORthought that the inconvenience to which his noble and learned Friend referred was experienced only in the smaller counties, where there were very few criminals for trial.
LORD BROUGHAMconsidered that the two circuits now held by Her Majesty's Judges in the course of the year were insufficient to meet the exigencies of the country. It was true that this Bill would effect improvements which would render the rare going of circuit by the Judges a lesser evil with regard to criminal proceedings; but the inconvenience with respect to civil proceedings would still remain the same. He would suggest, therefore, whether steps ought not to be taken to increase permanently the number of circuits. He should think that four circuits a year

1961
would not be by any means too many. He was quite aware that difficulties must be encountered before this, in his opinion, most beneficial change could be carried into effect; but he had no doubt that the suggestion would be candidly and fairly considered by the learned Judges, with a desire on their part, to do their duty in the manner most advantageous to the public service and to the administration of justice.
LORD CAMPBELLcould only say, as one of Her Majesty's Judges, that he was willing to serve either in town or country, wherever he might be required, and that no exertion on his part should be wanting for the due discharge of his duties; but he must remind his noble and learned Friend that the time of the Judges was now entirely occupied with the duties that were cast upon them. It would be utterly impossible, with the present staff of Judges, that assizes could be held so frequently as the noble and learned Lord proposed. If his noble and learned Friend thought it would be beneficial to have thirty Judges instead of fifteen, that was a matter for consideration; but he thought that such a proposition would be open to many objections. Unless, however, the number of Judges was considerably increased, it would be impossible to carry into effect the suggestion of his noble and learned Friend.
LORD ST. LEONARDShoped that no addition would be made to the number of the Judges. Nor could anything be more unwise than to call upon the magistrates to hold more frequent quarter sessions at the same time that it was proposed to increase their duties at petty sessions so considerably. He was sure that if it was left to the magistrates themselves to fix the times of holding the quarter sessions, they would make satisfactory arrangements for the administration of justice.
Amendments made; the Reports thereof to be received on Monday next.

THE TRANSPORT SERVICE.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE: My Lords, I rise for the purpose of moving for certain returns, of which I have given notice; and I shall ask your Lordships, if those returns are granted, to permit me to make some slight observations on the terms of my Motion. Under ordinary circumstances, I should content myself with morely moving for these returns; but there are peculiar reasons why I think it my duty upon this occasion to lay before
1962
your Lordships a statement of the case which induced me to bring them before the House. The information with which I have been supplied is, of course, not obtained from any official source, and it is probable, therefore, that it will not have the same degree of weight with your Lordships that any answer which may come from the Government may have; but, nevertheless, my Lords, in all the affairs of this war, the public have been so well informed, and so much feeling has been excited with regard to every branch of the services connected with the war, that, generally speaking, the information supplied to the country has been pretty accurate. Probably, if I were to enter into any detail upon this matter, I should morely weary your Lordships, and perhaps commit several of those errors which persons receiving their information from ordinary channels are liable to commit. Nevertheless, the broad features of the case which I am about to lay before your Lordships are, I believe, perfectly true, or your Lordships may be certain I should not have ventured to bring them before you. My Lords, nothing that I know of can convey a stronger feeling of the desire of this country to carry on the war with vigour than that the whole of the resources of the country should have been laid, as it were, at the feet of the Government. The other night the other House of Parliament voted, almost without discussion, a sum of upwards of 5,000,000 l. for the transport service of the ensuing year, notwithstanding that that House possessed the knowledge that during last year a sum of no less than 3,582,000 l. had been expended in the transport service of the country. It is partly for this reason, and also because the First Lord of the Admiralty, in bringing forward the Estimate, though making two general statements, wholly omitted the details of the transport service, that I am desirous, when the Estimates of the House of Commons are brought up in this House in the form of a Bill, to have placed in the hands of your Lordships the returns which I now ask for. It was stated in another place that the expenditure of the last year for the transport service was 3,582,474 l., and for the year 1855–6 the sum required was 5,081,465 l., which two sums taken together would, I believe, purchase the whole of the transports employed in the service of the Crown. The number of transports stated to be employed was not given in any detail, but it was stated that they were employed, more or less, during

1963
the year, thus implying that some ships had been employed for a short period and others for a long period. It was stated that 102 steam transports had been employed with a tonnage of 121,060 tons, and 153 sailing vessels with a tonnage of 93,172 tons, making altogether a tonnage of 214,232 tons. This gives a sum of about 16 l. a ton for the whole of the tonnage employed during the year. But the Government found coals for the steamers, which is a most important feature in this case, and one which I beg your Lordships to bear in mind. The Government agreed to find coals, in addition to the money paid for the hire of the transports. I say then that the 16 l. a ton paid for every description of vessel for the year does not appear at first sight an exorbitant sum; but we do not know the period for which the various vessels were employed—whether they were chiefly steam or sailing vessels, or what proportion of each was employed. It was necessary, in my opinion, that this information should have been given to Parliament, but that course was not adopted. The sum now asked for is so monstrous, that in recent periods—for instance, in the years 1830 and 1831 —the amount of money obtained for the whole service of the Royal Navy was about equal to the sum now asked for the maintenance of the transport service. The sums which have been voted in former years for the Royal Navy have varied from 5,000,000 l. to 6,000,000 l., and now a sum of 5,000,000 l. has been granted by the House of Commons for the transport service alone. Under such circumstances, it will naturally be asked, how has this amount of money been expended? My Lords, I venture to assert, with very great humility, that in the whole service of the Crown, under any circumstances whatever, there has hardly ever been evinced a greater degree of profligate extravagance with regard to the expenditure of the public money, a greater degree of carelessness and ignorance in the mode of making the contracts, a greater degree of slovenliness in employing the various vessels, and a less amount of arrangement in the vessels sailing from and coming into the ports of this country. Nay, more; in the quarter in which these ships have been employed—namely, the Black Sea—their utility has been destroyed by a system, or rather by a want of system and a want of arrangement in the various departments—in the receiving department, the landing department, the department for embarking the troops, and for
1964
carrying on, in short, all those mechanical operations necessary in a service of this description, and which are so familiar to all persons engaged in mercantile transactions in this country. Now, my Lords, I am bound to show, after making this statement, upon what grounds I venture to use such strong language. When the war first broke out it was thought necessary at once to employ a large amount of tonnage for the purpose of conveying our army a considerable distance for the invasion of an enemy's country. The Government then issued a notice to the public, stating that they were prepared to take up tonnage to a very considerable amount. Merchants came willingly forward with vessels of every amount of tonnage and every description of construction;—in short, the whole trade of the country seemed at once for the moment to be laid at the feet of the Crown. The Government then proceeded to contract for a certain amount of tonnage, and in the process of entering into these contracts they were induced to make arrangements upon terms which very much astonished the merchants, and led them to see at once that the persons engaged in a business of so important a nature were wholly and entirely ignorant of the manner in which such great mercantile transactions ought to be made and carried out. No doubt your Lordships will be perfectly aware that, in the ordinary technical language of builders and seafaring men, there are two distinct descriptions of tonnage—namely, builders' tonnage and registered tonnage; but some of your Lordships may not be aware of the amazing difference existing in a steam-vessel between the two descriptions of tonnage. To show your Lordships the difference which really does exist I will give you an instance. The builders' tonnage of the Britannia of the Cunard line is 1,154 tons, but her registered tonnage is only 619 tons, there being a tonnage of upwards of 500 tons occupied by her engines and propelling power. Now, my Lords, the gentlemen to whom the duty of making the contracts was intrusted sent away the merchants perfectly delighted with the news that the contracts about to be entered into would be made at so much per ton builders' tonnage. This was the beginning of a series of difficulties which could not be got over. The contracts were signed and the arrangements made; and, in addition to taking up the ships on these terms, Government undertook to supply the steamers with

1965
coals. In the midst of their difficulties the Government began to consider that the best mode of getting out of the position in which they found themselves placed would be to purchase the transports which they had hired, which would, of course, involve a very large expenditure of money at once. Up to a recent date two transports have been delivered into the hands of the Crown, and I am afraid that in the case of each of those transports a large additional expense will have to be borne by the country. The Prince was lost in the great storm in the Black Sea, and the Perseverance was upset in the dock, and can only be rendered fit for public service at a great outlay. This was the commencement of a series of accidents to the transport service which has involved the country in such an amount of expenditure. Another circumstance which had much to do with the loss of public money with reference to the transports was, that the Government entered into arrangements with another company that was engaged in the postal service between England and North America and the West Indies, and I think the amount of money paid for this postal service was between 200,000 l. and 300,000 l. per annum. The vessels of this company were taken up as transports, and they were allowed to enter into arrangements like any other merchants; and, having been thus deprived of the means of carrying on their postal contract, they were still allowed to receive the money they had contracted to receive for such postal service. This appears to me to have been another very great error. Added to this, since these contracts have been entered into by Government, great difficulty is found in sending to various parts of the world. You cannot send anything to the Crimea, for there is no regular communication kept up by the packets; and if you want to send there you are obliged to go to the Government and the officers of the Crown, and beg them to assist you in sending anything you may desire to the Crimea, or any other part of the world. After the Government had entered into these contracts one would suppose that the greatest vigilance and earnestness would have been used on their part to keep these vessels in constant employ, for the purpose of saving as much as they could under the circumstances; but a great number of these transports have been kept so extremely idle that while their owners have revelled in advantageous contracts, they have not been called upon in many instances to perform any great
1966
amount of work. The Simla, a very large vessel of near 3,000 tons, lay at Constantinople for six weeks, having nothing whatever to do. Another case occurred in the Black Sea—a vessel was freighted from England with boots and shoes; when it arrived at Balaklava, there was no person to whom the cargo was consigned, it was not allowed to be received; and it is a notorious fact that this vessel crossed the Black Sea three times before it could get rid of its cargo. Another flagrant case of mismanagement was what I may call the potato case. Owing to the anxiety of the Government to give the army relief and assistance, a transport obtained a cargo of potatoes; but, as there was no consignment or consignee or bills of lading, these potatoes could not be received at Balaklava; the master of the transport, very wisely, seeing the potatoes would be destroyed if kept longer on board, permitted the people on the shore to take the potatoes away; they did so; and these persons sold the potatoes at the highest possible price they could exact to the troops, to whom they were intended as a gift. I have shown that these contracts and the mode of dealing with these transports have been attended with great loss to the country. But this is not all; let us see what takes place at home in cases where transports are called upon to carry troops or stores to the Crimea. I am happy to be able to state that if the transport was employed for carrying naval stores as connected with the dockyard, there the mode in which the arrangements have been conducted was perfect in itself; the ship was properly laden, the stores which were to be last delivered were put underneath, while those to be delivered first were placed at the top, and there was a constant uniformity and good management in reference to the dockyards and the officers connected with them. But if, on the other hand, it happened that the transport was called on to load with stores for the army, then they had confusion worse confounded; they had the Treasury and Commissariat sending stores, the Ordnance sending shot and shell, the Medical Department with its medical stores, and other departments wrangling which stores should be put in first and which last; in many cases the articles last wanted were stowed away uppermost; and in many instances the vessels sailed with their tonnage not completed, while in other cases vessels became crowded to excess, and carried more than they ought. So much for the vessels on leav-

1967
ing the ports of this country. We have heard enough of their reception at Balaklava; but I should like to say a few words on the vessels arriving in this country. The vessels bring invalids, and generally put in at Portsmouth. 2They are of considerable tonnage, and, though well adapted to be handled in great waters, they are unfit for the navigation of small rivers. After they have arrived at Portsmouth, and landed part of their men orders are frequently sent to them to come round to the Medway for the purpose of landing the remainder of their men, and the value of the coals consumed by these vessels in going up the Medway and returning to Portsmouth, is, at the present price, equal to 400 l.; and the object was to land, perhaps, 100 invalids, who might have been conveyed by railway for less than 50 l. It was not until it was found at how small a sum the men could be conveyed to Chatham and elsewhere by railway, that it was thought more desirable to adopt this mode of conveyance than to bring the vessels up the Medway at such an expense. These are instances of mismanagement that have been attended with such a large expenditure of public money as renders the case one most important for the consideration not only of the other House, but of Parliament, for the purpose of rectifying these tremendous mistakes and abuses that have arisen in all departments with reference to this war. Such has been the confusion in the embarkation of cargoes and the ignorance of the Government with reference to the character of the cargoes embarked, that when the Prince was lost the Admiralty wrote to every dockyard in the country, inquiring if they knew what was in her—if they knew the cargo received at that particular port. Every port in the south said they had never heard of the ship until it was lost;—and the fact was that it was laden under the very nose of the Government in the Thames. In addition to the valuable cargo that was lost in the Prince, report said that 200,000 l. in money went down in her, and I should like to know whether this was so. My Lords, I have now stated very shortly a few of the points bearing most strongly on this question, and which form the grounds that induce me to move for these returns. There is nothing of more importance—as I think there is nothing more easy of attainment—in the conduct of the war than the regular and proper management of the transport service. In a mercantile State like this, or like the United States of
1968
America, such a service may be considered to be only part and parcel of the commercial system of the country; and if the Government had only consulted any of our great merchants, both as to the mode of taking up shipping and the manner of afterwards turning it to account, I am confident that the cost of conducting the communications with the army in the Crimea would have been greatly lightened. Of this fact I am convinced, if I only look at the mode in which the ships were hired and supplied with coal. That the Government should furnish the steam-vessels with coal may be perfectly necessary, in order to remove excuses for delay based upon alleged detention from the want of fuel; but the principle on which the coal has been supplied by the Government is very wasteful, and affords no check against abuse. If the merchant or the captain fills his vessel with fuel, the Government has no means of knowing whether he gave any part of his supply away or assisted any other merchant vessel with it. Now, I would suggest that the Government should contract with the owner for the use of his vessel, including the price of coal, and should reserve to itself the power of deducting an average rate—say, 50 s.—for every ton that it supplied to the vessel. By this means it would be made the merchant's interest to economise the fuel and give none of it away. The cost of coal is a serious item in steam navigation, and a vessel of the power of the Himalaya or the Simla requires an amount of fuel to propel her of the value of not less than 9,000 l. or 10,000 l. per annum. I have mentioned the case of the Simla, which lay so long idle at Constantinople, although she was hired by the Government at a rate per month which would make 90,000 l. a year. Now, I have taken the trouble, with the assistance of other persons who are competent authorities on such a subject, to calculate the amount that ought to be paid for the use of such a ship if fairly hired and required to find her own fuel, and I compute the sum at the rate of 46,750 l. per annum. I do not say that errors may not have found their way into the public mind regarding the cost of the transport service to the country; but it is obviously most desirable that your Lordships should be set right respecting a branch of the public expenditure of the magnitude of 5,000,000 l. a year. Within the last few days, I am sorry to say, I learn that the same profitless expenditure has been continued as has been going on

1969
from the outset. Public attention has been much aroused on the subject of the green coffee supplied to the army in the Crimea, and the Government have been anxious to correct the evil complained of as speedily as possible, by employing a ship to convey a cargo of roasted coffee to the East. A merchant found a ship for the Government, and as this is a case which illustrates the manner in which the merchants are able to deal with the Government, I will briefly relate the circumstances to your Lordships. The name of the steamer engaged for this service was the Telegraph, a vessel which was originally employed as a packet in plying between England and Ireland. The Telegraph is a fast vessel, and she had run a race with some of the boats on the Irish station. She was far too expensive for her work, and her owners were glad to get her chartered for a cargo by the Government. She was of 500 tons register, and about 900 tons builders' measurement, and of 440-horse power. Her consumption of coal was three tons per hour, and about 400 tons of cargo were considered quite enough' for her when engaged in the coasting trade. Her cost was 28,000 l., and at what rate, then, did the Government hire her? Why, at 2,500 l. per month, which would enable her owners in ten months to realise the whole value of the vessel! Well, the Telegraph was laden with coffee, and was to sail for the Crimea, and General Simpson was about to embark in her; but when he saw her, the gallant General refused to go out in such a ship, and he did not do it either;—indeed, the vessel did not go herself, for she was found so deeply laden with coffee that the water ran into her at the closet-tubes, and she had to be taken into dock. I believe, however, she sailed at last, but if she meets with southerly winds in the Atlantic, I dare say she will have to put in for coals at Vigo, and again at Malta; and after three or four stoppages of this kind she may arrive at Constantinople; but it is doubtful, after all, whether this much-wanted coffee will ever reach the troops. The facts I have mentioned are only samples of the occurrences that have so justly excited the public discontent and indignation. I do not assert that there is any ground, with our present knowledge, upon all these circumstances, to warrant us in passing any censure upon the Government; but I think it is necessary that we should be furnished with official information relating to these transactions; and to obtain that informa-
1970
tion, as I have stated, is the object of my present Motion for returns. The noble Earl then concluded by moving—
"That there be laid before this House—1, Return of the Number of Transports employed in carrying Troops and Munitions of War, between the 1st of November 1853 and the 1st of March 1855 inclusive: 2. The Name of each Vessel (Transport); distinguishing those purchased from those hired 3. her Tonnage under old and new Measurement, distinguishing Steam from Sailing vessels, 4. If Steam, Number of nominal and indicated Horse Power: 5. Showing the Amount of Tonnage occupied by Machinery, Coals, Crew, Water, Provisions, and Ship Stores: 6. Showing what Amount is left for Cargo: 7. Showing the Number of Tons of Coal consumed: 8. Showing if any Transport is under Agreement for Postal or any other Service previous to being taken up as a transport: 9. Show in the Amount paid for the Hiring of each Vessel per Month or per Year, with or without Coals: 10. How long a Period each Transport was hired for, and from what Date: 11. For what Service she was engaged: 12. Prom what Owner she was hired: 13. Showing whether any Alteration has been made in the Terms since first hired, and, if any, what Difference: 14. If Alterations have been made (or Fittings added) in the internal Arrangements of any Transport, describing the Alteration or Fitting, with the Vessel's Name: 15. At whose Expense the Alteration or Fitting has been made, and the Amount of the Expense incurred."
LORD PANMURE: My Lords, it was quite impossible for me when the noble Earl opposite gave notice of this Motion to anticipate all the statements that he intended to make on this occasion; but I readily give the noble Earl credit for having no other object in touching upon the topics to which he has referred than that of obtaining accurate information as to the matters to which they relate. I also fully admit that Parliament is entitled to the strictest account of the expenditure of the large sums which have been required for the transport service. To the production of the returns asked for by the noble Earl, I know of no objection; and, as he proposes to amend his Motion in some particulars, I shall be glad to confer with him with regard to those Amendments. The Government which preceded the one to which I have the honour to belong were quite sensible that in the hurry of sending out the expedition to the East errors might have been committed, and blame incurred by the persons whose duties were connected with the transport service. With the view of remedying those evils the Government appointed officers of their own to make special inquiries into the mismanagement in loading and unloading the transports to which the noble Earl has referred. Those officers have forwarded their reports to me this day, but I have not yet had an oppor-

1971
tunity of making myself acquainted with their contents. An inquiry is going on as to the whole subject, and there will be no difficulty in making public the result of that inquiry after the Government have had an opportunity of considering it. With regard to the chartering of steamers, I have made inquiries, and I am assured that those intrusted with these transactions made the bargains with their eyes open, fully aware of the difference between hiring by the register and by the gross tonnage; and I am assured, too, that the contract price upon the whole of the gross tonnage was much lower than it would have been if made upon the registered tonnage; so that, had the steamers been hired on the registered tonnage, they would have cost nominally a much larger figure per ton. With reference to the various points referred to by the noble Earl—such, for instance, as the cargo of boots and shoes sent out without invoice or notice—all these will be matters for inquiry. A stop has now been put to the recurrence of such things by the institution by the late First Lord of the Admiralty of a Transport Board, which will reduce the transport service to order and regularity. A gentleman from the mercantile community has been placed upon that Board, in order that it may have the benefit of the experience of the merchant service; and I confidently hope that the reform commenced by the late First Lord of the Admiralty will have the result of making the transport service more regular and more efficient. It must be remembered that we have not only had to transport, land, and re-transport our own army, but that we have also had to carry large quantities of men and stores for our allies—both the French and the Turks; everything was expected to be done, too, with the utmost rapidity; and, taking all things into consideration, though there may have been some deviation from the regular process of business transactions, and omissions and mistakes have been occasionally committed, I think your Lordships must confess the transport service has been on the whole efficiently executed. Every step, however, is being taken to remedy whatever was deficient, and to put matters on the best possible footing. Of course I have no hesitation to agree to the production of the returns for which the noble Earl has moved.
THE EARL OF DERBY: The noble Lord who has just sat down, having apologetically and fully admitted that there has been great neglect, great mismanagement,
1972
and very considerable abuse in relation to this subject, and having promised to produce the returns asked for by my noble Friend behind me—which returns will show the extent of that abuse, and which will inform us who are the men that are responsible—this, of course, is not a fitting opportunity for continuing the discussion. My only object now is to call attention to a statement which appeared in one of the last despatches of Lord Raglan, to the effect that the condition of the army was generally improving; but that there was one subject of complaint and suffering, inasmuch as the Commissariat had not received at that time a large amount of hay and forage which was expected from England. Now, I wish to ask the noble Lord whether he has ascertained the cause of this apparent neglect in the furnishing of the hay and forage for the small number of horses that remained in our army in the Crimea? and whether he thought that blame was to be attached to any individual for not furnishing this hay, and whether care has been taken to ensure a more regular supply?
LORD PANMURE: Before I answer the question of the noble Earl, I beg, in the first place, to deny that I have made an apologetic speech, or that I have admitted that great neglect and great abuses have existed in relation to this subject; and I trust that the noble Earl will not misinterpret what falls from me in future. In reference to the question of the supply of hay for our horses in the Crimea, the information I have to give the noble Earl is this:—No doubt, at the period at which Lord Raglan wrote, there was a deficiency of hay at Balaklava. I confess that that statement rather surprised me, because, if there is any one article more than another of which I felt assured there would be a regular supply, it was that of hay and forage; for I knew that my noble Friend who preceded me in office had taken the most perfect means for the supply of forage for our army. It happened, however, that within a day or two after the letter alluded to had been written by Lord Raglan, a large supply of hay and forage had arrived at Balaklava; and I have every reason to believe that measures have been taken to ensure a regular supply of forage at Balaklava at least every fortnight, and therefore there is not the slightest prospect of the army being distressed for want of it.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHasked the noble Lord whether he did not think it more advisable to have the hay supplied by

1973
private contract? He apprehended that a great saving would be effected by adopting sash a course.
LORD PANMUREsaid, he rather thought that the noble Earl was mistaken. He found, upon inquiry, that under the contracts entered into by the Government they had obtained hay at a cheaper rate than the ordinary contractors would be able to procure it.
VISCOUNT CANNINGsaid, there was one point mentioned by the noble Earl in his statement to which he wished to allude, With respect to his observations in reference to the postal services, he begged to assure the noble Earl, that not only in respect to the Cunard steamers, but to those of every other Company carrying mails whose vessels had been taken up as transports, there was a rateable reduction made from the postal subsidy. So far from the Messrs. Cunard receiving 200,000 l. or 300,000 l. for their postal services last year, they would only receive such a sum as was equivalent to the service they were able to perform with their reduced fleet.
On Question, agreed to.
House adjourned to Thursday next.