§ THE EARL OF HARDWICKEI wish to put a question to my noble Friend opposite, which I do not care whether he answers or not. I see by the newspapers that an appointment has been made in one of the Government offices which has attracted my attention. I am the last person to presume to interfere with the authority of the Crown in any way, and particularly with reference to such appointments as that to which I refer; but I wish to notice this case because I think it is one of great importance to the public. I see that a gentleman of the name of Phinn is appointed to succeed Admiral Hamilton in the office of Second Secretary to the Admiralty. Mr. Phinn, I find from a little book I hold in my hand, called Dod's Parliamentary Companion, is Member of Parliament for Bath, and I should do him great injustice if I did not read all that Dod says about him. "Mr. Phinn is a man who has been highly educated at Eton and at Oxford, where he was first class in classics in 1837. He is a Liberal; in favour of household suffrage, vote by ballot, and the fullest development of free-trade principles; will vote for inquiry respecting Maynooth, jointly with the other ecclesiastical establishments of Ireland." Now, I believe the appointment of Second Secretary to the Admiralty has always been a non-political and non-removable appointment. That secretaryship was held 950 for a long period by Mr. Barrow, and the office has since been filled by Captain (now Admiral) Hamilton and other naval officers. The late Government considered that that office should not only be non-political, but that it should be held by a naval officer. It would, undoubtedly, be a very great inconvenience to the public service that this secretaryship, as well as the other secretaryship to the Admiralty, should be made a political office; for both the secretaries would, in such a case, be removable upon any change of Government, and a considerable embarrassment might thus be caused to the public service. I beg to ask the noble Earl Opposite whether it is true that Mr. Phinn has been appointed Second Secretary to the Admiralty?
§ EARL GRANVILLEI do not quite admit that my noble Friend's not caring whether he gets an answer or not is a perfectly good reason for putting the question without notice, and taking the opportunity of making a speech prefacing that question. I certainly think, when noble Lords put questions of this sort, materially affecting the public interests, they should give some notice of their intentions. At the same time I have no hesitation in informing the noble Earl that it is quite true Mr. Phinn has been appointed Second Secretary to the Admiralty. I may also say that I believe the appointment of naval men to that office is the exception; that Mr. Barrow, who filled the office for thirty years, was not a naval man; and that I think the qualifications of a highly educated man, and especially of a highly educated lawyer, are likely at a time of war to be particularly useful to the Admiralty.
§ THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHI confess, my Lords, that I saw the announcement of the appointment to which my noble Friend's question referred with very deep regret, in the first place, on account of the loss of the services of Admiral Hamilton. I had the opportunity of observing the conduct of that gallant officer while I was for a short time at the Board of Admiralty, and, I must say, I think the public will sustain a very great loss in being deprived of his services. I see no reason whatever why he should not still have retained the office after attaining the rank of Rear-Admiral, Of Mr. Phinn I know nothing at all, and I can have no objection to his appointment except in so far as I object to the appointment of any 951 civilian to that office. In the case of Captain Hamilton, it might have been accidental that a naval man had been appointed to the post, but I am quite sure that the appointment of a naval officer to such a situation ought to be the rule, and not the exception. The person who occupies the position of Second Secretary to the Admiralty has to transact a great deal of very important business, and, as far as I can recollect, he has to revise the letters which are addressed in the name of the Admiralty to naval officers. That is a duty which requires tact, courtesy, and knowledge of the profession, and an acquaintance with the feelings of the profession. I recollect perfectly well, when I was for a short time at the Admiralty, that I happened accidentally to see one of the letters addressed in the name of the Admiralty to a naval officer, and I said it was not couched in language in which any naval officer ought to be addressed. Indeed, it would not be proper to address a gentleman in such a style. I mentioned the circumstance to Captain Hamilton, who was much pleased with the observations I made, and asked if he might have authority to correct the language of such communications in future, so as to bring it more into conformity with the gentlemanlike language adopted in the army, and which was always practised by the late Duke of Wellington. It is absolutely necessary, in my opinion, that any one who fills the office of Second Secretary to the Admiralty should be thoroughly acquainted with the feelings of the service. It is desirable that the First Lord of the Admiralty should have an opportunity of communicating confidentially with a gentleman fully acquainted with the naval profession; and to place in such an office as that of Second Secretary any civilian, whatever his abilities may be, is, in my opinion, decidedly detrimental to the public service.
§ EARL GRANVILLEI have nothing to add to my former statement, except, in expressing my full concurrence in the testimony borne by the noble Earl who last addressed your Lordships to the services of Admiral Hamilton, to say that, for a long time past, that gallant officer has been most desirous to retire from the office he has held with so much credit to himself and so much advantage to the public. I cannot, however, agree with the noble Earl that, because a gentleman belongs to the legal and not to the naval 952 profession, he would not take care that letters addressed to naval officers should be written in a proper style of courtesy. I may also say, that the secretaryship was offered to a naval officer before it was offered to and accepted by the gentleman who has been referred to, and who, I believe, is likely to discharge his duties very efficiently.
§ In reply to a question from Lord COLCHESTER,
§ EARL GRANVILLEsaid, it was very desirable that noble Lords should give notice of their intention to put questions to the Government bearing upon subjects of this kind. One of the secretaryships to the Admiralty was a Parliamentary office; the other was not; and he believed Mr. Phinn had already resigned his seat in Parliament in consequence of having accepted the appointment.