VISCOUNT MELVILLErose to put a Question to Her Majesty's Government on the subject of the loss of Her Majesty's troop-ship Megæra. The noble Viscount said, it might be recollected that at an early part of the Session a discussion arose in the House of Commons as to the capacity of the Megæra to undertake a sea voyage, it being then alleged that she leaked from stem to stern, and was altogether unfit to make the voyage for which she was destined. That statement was contradicted, and the Megæra proceeded to Plymouth, making such a dreadful passage that her decks were completely covered with water. From Plymouth the Megæra went to Queenstown, and the officer commanding the ship reported the state of the vessel to the Admiral there, representing that the water was passing over the main-deck, that the ports leaked, and that the discomfort on board was very great. The 1078 Admiral, under these circumstances, inspected the vessel, and ordered 100 tons of her stores to be discharged from her, with a view to lightening her. It appeared that in 1866 Mr. Reed inspected the Megæra, and it was reported from Woolwich that she might be seaworthy for eighteen months or two years, and for only short service, and not for a distant voyage. At the time when the complaints to which he had referred were made, Mr. Baxter—who, it had been stated, was responsible, and not the First Naval Lord, for the administration of the Navy in the absence of the First Lord of the Admiralty—declared that the statement of the unseaworthiness of the Megæra was totally untrue. However, the result was now known, and it appeared that the vessel was excessively worn out, and had on board somewhere about 300 seamen and officers beyond her regular crew at the time of the disaster. The number of men was altogether beyond what she was calculated to carry, and it now appeared that a report was made to the effect that her boilers were only fit for service for one year. Notwithstanding that report, she was sent out on a long voyage, in the course of which she somehow or other sprang a leak, and the crew and passengers were cast upon a volcanic island, with what means of subsistence he did not know. He had seen a letter in the newspaper stating that there was plenty of fish there and hot water to cook them in, and he hoped to hear that that statement was accurate. He should like to know who signed the order, and who was responsible for this vessel being sent to sea. On the occasion of a Court Martial being held on account of the loss of the vessel, their Lordships were aware that it was not the persons who sent the vessel to sea who were tried, but it was the unfortunate officer commanding the ship who was made to suffer all the obloquy, annoyance, and expense, attached to a trial by Court Martial. He should be glad to know what was the condition of the unfortunate crew and passengers, and what steps had been taken to relieve them?
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNadmitted the extreme gravity of the matter brought under their Lordships' notice, and if he did not discuss it at great length it was because their Lordships had an opportunity of seeing all the 1079 documents connected with it in the newspapers of that morning. But the Admiralty were not in a position to form a proper opinion as to the causes of the disaster which befell the vessel. On the 13th of January the Admiralty telegraphed to Sheerness to ascertain whether, if the Megæra were wanted for nine months' service, she was in a fit state to undertake it, and what time would be required before she could receive her crew and a large body of supernumeraries. She had on board 342 men, and more than once she had carried about 400 men, and one occasion 424, and therefore could not be said to be excessively overloaded. On the 17th of January the Megæra was reported to be a good seaboat, and, although more than 20 years old, sound and strong, her boilers, however, being described as only fit for one year's service. On the 23rd of January the Commander-in-Chief at Sheerness was asked whether she could take 300 men, and he replied that she could, and 350 tons of stores. The Commander-in-Chief at Queenstown telegraphed stating that the Megæra had put into that port in consequence of leaking from her main-deck ports. He was afterwards directed to use his discretion in lightening the vessel, and, having taken out 127 tons from the 350 on board, and landed four of the officers who were proceeding in her, he reported that she was fit to undertake the service on which she had been ordered. Admiral Codrington was also requested to report upon certain statements which had appeared in the newspapers, and said he had heard nothing about the alleged leaking or unseaworthiness of the vessel. When the cargo had been removed, the Commander-in-Chief at Queenstown telegraphed—"Shall she proceed?" and the Admiralty replied—"Certainly, if you approve." It was not correct to suppose that the draught of water of the Megæra on this occasion—16.6 forward and 17.1 aft—was greater than it had been on many previous occasions; and as to the two defects which had been then brought to the notice of the Admiralty—leakage at the main-deck ports and the presence of too much cargo—both were dealt with, and it was with the approval of the officer commanding at Queenstown that the Megæra finally went to sea. Of course, such a matter as the sufficiency of the iron plates of 1080 the vessel could not be examined by the Commander-in-Chief there, who would naturally look to the Construction department of the Admiralty at the port from which the ship sailed. 127 tons were taken out of the ship at Queenstown, three more at Ascension, and 55 at the Cape. The vessel could not, therefore, have been too deep in the water when she left the Cape. As to the general character of the ship before her employment upon this service, the Admiralty had reports since 1865 from three captains and two staff commanders, who all agreed that she seemed to be strong and well-built, and that she was a good seaboat in heavy weather. The last of these reports was given in 1870. Admiral Forbes and the captain superintendent at Sheerness both said they had not the slightest doubt as to her seaworthiness, and should have no objection to take a voyage in her themselves. Of her seaworthiness no doubt appeared to have ever been entertained. The noble Viscount had asked what amount of provisions the Megæra was likely to have on board when she left the Cape. The vessel was well provisioned when she left Queenstown; she would replenish at the Cape, and would probably then have as much as when she left Queenstown. She had also on leaving Queenstown her full complement of coals, and would take in more at Ascension and the Cape, so that she would probably have her full complement on leaving the Cape. The noble Viscount had asked who signed the order sending her to sea. He could not undertake to say with precision, and thought he had better defer an answer to this Question. The Admiralty calculated that assistance would reach the crew on the 24th of this month, at which time it was expected the Rinaldo would reach the island from Singapore with provisions; but in any case the Peninsular and Oriental steamer Malacca would arrive at St. Paul's from Hong Kong on the 29th, so that help would certainly arrive at about the end of the month. Fortunately, in addition to her own sails, there were on board other sails for vessels on the Australian station, so that the belief at the Admiralty was that the officers and seamen would find no want of canvas under which to encamp. The important point in connection with the unseaworthiness of the vessel was the thinness of the plates, and Mr. Reed 1081 had written a letter in which he stated that in 1866 he inspected the Megæra, and reported her fit for 18 months' service, after certain repairs were executed, arguing that the Admiralty ought, therefore, to have understood that, at the end of the period thus mentioned, the Megæra was not fit to be retained any longer in the service. Now, it frequently happened that estimates were made for the repairs of vessels, and it was said that they would be serviceable for a certain time; but when that time had expired the ship was not condemned, she was put into dock and again reported on; and it was not till then that the question was discussed whether she was or was not worn out. On this particular occasion the officers at Woolwich sent in a supplementary estimate amounting to £250, reporting the bottom to be in good condition, and the plates there three-eighths of an inch thick, but adding that the plates between wind and water all round the vessel were very thin, and that although the officers considered she would, with the repairs recommended, be fit for temporary service, she would require to be doubled in the parts above named. That was the report to the Constructor's department from Woolwich, and upon it the Chief Constructor reported that he had made a careful examination of the ship, and was of opinion that this supplementary estimate should be allowed, as the ship might remain fit for service for eighteen months or two years longer when repaired. Mr. Reed did not say that at the end of that period she would be unfit for further service, and at the end of that term, in the natural course of things, the vessel would be reported on again. What happened? Did Mr. Reed, at the end of 1868, call the attention of the Admiralty to the fact that she was not fit for service any longer, and ought to be condemned? Not at all. In 1868 the Megæra went from Devonport to Rio, from Rio to Ascension; again from Plymouth to Rio, and from Rio to Ascension. In 1869 she went from England to Rio, from Rio to the Falkland Islands and Ascension, and also went to Sierra Leone. In 1870 an estimate was sent from Sheerness for her repair, and £954 was asked for, the officers at Sheerness reporting that the vessel required to be docked, and that her bottom was said to be very thin in many places. They were asked to revise 1082 their estimate, which was thought a large one. They did so, and then reported that the bottom was in a better condition than was expected, so that they would be able to reduce the estimate to £787, and that reduced estimate was approved by Mr. Reed. In 1870 the Megæra came into collision with another vessel. Again Mr. Reed directed repairs, and from Sheerness the report came that there were no defects in her machinery, and that she was ready for another year's service; and, in fact, in the course of 1870 she made several voyages to and from Malta. It was much to be regretted that the attention of the Admiralty was not specifically called to the report of the Sheerness officers upon which Mr. Reed said that, if certain repairs were executed, the Megæra would be fit for 18 months' service. It was also to be regretted that this report was never mentioned between 1866 and 1870, during all which years the attention of the Admiralty was called on no one occasion to the fact that her plates were thin. No doubt a Court Martial would be held upon Captain Thrupp; but it had been already stated in "another place" that a most strict inquiry would be made into this most unusual and extraordinary calamity. Of course, at present nothing could be known with certainty as to the cause; but assuming that a hole had come in the centre of one of the plates of the vessel, that was a most unprecedented circumstance, and would form the subject of a most careful and considerate investigation. Until, however, they know with certainty what had caused the leak and the loss of the vessel, it would not be right to indulge in conjectures. He had now stated the facts of the case exactly as they were in the possession of the Admiralty, and in due time he would be prepared to defend the course which they had pursued. In conclusion, he had simply to ask their Lordships to suspend their judgment, for they were as yet unacquainted with the actual circumstances which had led to the loss of the ship. It must be borne in mind that the report of 1866 related to the plates which were near the water-line, and he thought it might be assumed that the defect had occurred somewhere near the bottom of the vessel. If it had occurred near the water-line it would in all probability have been remedied in some such way as to enable 1083 her to proceed on her voyage, unless, indeed, it happened to be of a very serious character.
§ THE DUKE OF RICHMONDthanked the noble Earl for the candid and straightforward manner in which he had answered the Questions which had been put to him by his noble Friend (Viscount Melville.) He did not, he might add, propose on the present occasion to enter into a discussion on the supposed or probable cause of the very lamentable accident which had befallen the Megæra. He must, however, observe that he thought the conduct of the Admiralty—he would not say what part of it—was most unsatisfactory as regarded that ship. He had not read anything which had been published in the newspapers on the subject, so that he could comment with the utmost impartiality on the statement which their Lordships had just heard. According to the noble Earl's own showing, the Megæra had been examined in 1866, and was then reported to be capable of eighteen months' or two years' service with repairs. That would bring her down to the middle of 1868, and she afterwards performed voyages in various parts of the globe, and the noble Earl had read several reports to show that up to 1870 she was considered to be seaworthy. In 1870, however, so far as he could see, was to be found the origin of the whole mischief. In that year a report was sent to the Admiralty describing certain defects in her, it being stated, among other things, that she was thin in various places.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNIt was said that her bottom was stated to be very thin in various places; but that when she was put into dock it was found to be better than had been expected.
§ THE DUKE OF RICHMONDobserved that the impression which had been conveyed to him by the statement of the noble Earl was that a report had been sent into the Admiralty to the effect that the vessel was believed to be thin in various places. That being so, an estimate was made for her repair, but that estimate was pronounced to be excessive.
§ THE DUKE OF RICHMONDBut with a view, he apprehended to its being reduced, not increased. The estimate was reduced and the repairs were effected, 1084 and then she was looked upon as being capable of doing only one year's service. Now, that he regarded as an unfortunate circumstance, and as one which might perhaps have led to the disaster which their Lordships and the country now so much deplored.
§ VISCOUNT HALIFAXpointed out that the estimate was reduced in 1870 because it was found that the whole of the repairs for which it had been made were not necessary. When the vessel was taken into dock it was discovered that her bottom was in a much better condition than had been expected, and she was, after the repairs had been executed, reported to be fit for special service and quite seaworthy. It was, of course, impossible at the present to say what the precise cause of the accident was, and he hoped their Lordships would therefore suspend their judgment.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, it was quite clear the Megæra was a suspected vessel in 1870, and that when it was reported that her bottom was thin, and an estimate was sent in for the purpose of repairing it, the officers of the department were instructed to re-consider that estimate. He must also remark that throughout the course of the discussions on the subject the duty of the Government, or the responsible officers of the Crown, appeared to be thrown on the irresponsible or permanent officers. The Government tried to defend themselves by referring to the reports of competent men, on whose advice they contended they were bound to rely. The weakness of that defence would, however, be at once perceived when it was remembered how matters really stood. The permanent officers were made distinctly to understand that they must reconsider their original estimate; it was re-considered, and a year after a hole was found in the bottom of the ship. Of course the work might be done at a cheaper rate and yet done well; but it was not at all improbable that the reports of the officers were biassed by the knowledge that they would best please their superiors by reducing the estimate. The case, indeed, afforded another instance of that false economy which, at an early period of their existence, the Government deemed it necessary to pursue. He could not help thinking that the course of retrenchment on which they had entered in consequence of the 1085 pledges which had been given when they were last before the country had had a very injurious effect on the two services, the Megæra being one of the subjects on which they operated. It was but too probable that the political necessities of noble Lords opposite in 1868, and the unfortunate policy which resulted from them, were the causes which led to the present disaster.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, the original estimate for repairing of the Megæra was £954, and the revised estimate £787, and the noble Marquess assumed that the small difference between these two sums led to the loss of the Megæra.