Sitting of 13 February 1827

CORN-LAWS.
Sir E. Knatchbull,in presenting a Petition against any alteration in the Corn-Laws, took occasion to ask the right hon. Secretary opposite in what mode government intended to proceed, in bringing forward the question. He expressed his deep regret that the consideration of it had been so long postponed; for, if the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs was too unwell to bring it forward speedily, it might have been done by the President of the Board of Trade. The subject was of the greatest importance, and the public mind was intensely interested in it. If the matter should, how-. ever, be brought forward at the time announced, he wished to be informed what was the course which the government meant to adopt? Did they intend to proceed by bill? or was it their intention to refer the matter to a committee of the whole House?
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that although he must decline giving any answer as to the nature of the measure which government intended to submit to the House, he had no objection to say that the course of proceeding which it was at present intended to adopt was, to move resolutions in a committee of the whole House, which resolutions would contain the plan in detail. If these resolutions should be agreed to, then the intention was, that they should be printed for the use of the members, and be re-committed on a future day, that gentlemen might have an opportunity of giving this important subject the fullest possible consideration.

NAVY ESTIMATES—IMPRESSMENT OF SEAMEN.
Sir G. Clerkbrought up the report of the committee of supply on the Navy Estimates. On the resolutions being read,
Sir John Newportsaid, he was desirous of adding his voice to those which had already been raised in that House against the present system of impressing seamen. He should never be convinced that, in this country, there was not a power to call a sufficient number of men into service whenever it might be necessary, without the exercise of that which he considered absolute tyranny. It had been shown, again and again, in that House and in numerous publications, that such means did exist; and he believed in his conscience, that until the tyrannous system to which he objected should be done away, it would operate as a drawback upon the desire which men would otherwise evince to enter the service. The consequence was, that they would be driven to other countries; and the experience of the late war with America had shown the mischievous consequences of having the enemy's ships manned and fought by British seamen. He hoped the subject would engage the serious attention of those who had the care of the British navy. The expense which it might occasion was of no consequence. He should never cease to bear testimony to this abominable hardship; and he wished that, as his voice had been raised in the earliest part of his parliamentary life against this system, so his latest effort—which could not be far distant—might be directed to rescue the men who were properly called the bulwarks of their country, from the tyranny to which they were exposed.
Mr. Warburtonwas of opinion, that it the question were put to the merchants and ship-owners, whether the system of impressment were injurious or otherwise, they would, one and all, protest against it, The shipping interest was materially affected by it; for what could be a greater hardship on the part of the owners, than that the men who worked their vessels should be taken out of them, after perhaps a long and hazardous voyage, on their arrival in the chops of the Channel? The whole system of impressment was degrading to the country, and destructive of that free spirit for which British seamen were distinguished. He was sure that the people of Great Britain would sooner submit to additional taxation, if no other means could be found by which the system of naval impressments might be abolished.
Sir George Clerkcontended, that the view which hon. members seemed to take of the system of impressment was founded on erroneous reasoning. It was only in cases of peculiaremergency that this mode of raising men for the service was resorted to. A sufficient supply of seamen could always be had, without having recourse to the system complained of; but the House should bear in mind, before it insisted too strongly on its abolition, that there were circumstances in which it might be necessary to require a fleet to be manned with extraordinary despatch; which could only be accomplished by resorting to impressment. The hon. member had talked of the hardship of taking men from merchant ships on their arrival in the Channel; but, would not the merchants have much more cause of complaint, if government had not provided the means of defending their shipping from the enemy? It was to be hoped that the system of impressment would be so modified, as to strip it of its grievances; and that the liberality which the country had displayed in bestowing pensions on those sailors who had served their country would have the effect of making the service less irksome. He thought it wrong, however, to insist too strongly on putting an end to impressment altogether, particularly when it was considered that the salvation of the country might depend on the celerity with which we could command a navy.
Mr. Lombeconceived that there must be something wrong in the system pursued by our navy, otherwise the sailors
452
employed in the service would not be so prone to desert to other states. From the king's packets that plied to New York and Halifax, several desertions had taken place, which could only be traced to something faulty in the management of that service.
Sir G. Clerkreplied, that the greater part of the packets alluded to were hired vessels, the crews of which were not under military law. The removal had taken place in consequence of the great length of time which the vessels were detained at New York. Their men had not deserted into the American navy, but had been induced by high wages—a dollar a day—to work at unloading the ships in the harbour.
Mr. Humewished to state the result of the inquiries which he had made on the subject. It was generally admitted, that the service of the navy was less laborious, and that the men had less labour, better food, better regulations, and more advantages, than in the merchant service. They stated, that it was not the inferiority of the wages to the wages in the merchant service of which they complained, for that was compensated by pensions. Thousands of seamen had been examined, and they one and all declared, that their aversion to the service arose from the discipline to which they were subjected. That such discipline was unnecessary had been proved in various cases. In the Bulwark of 74 there had not been a single corporal punishment inflicted for eighteen months. The seamen were dissatisfied that a commander had it in his power to order the infliction of a summary punishment which degraded the individual for ever, and that there was no redress. To impressment they did not object on an emergency. But they objected to being torn from their families by impressment, and then kept in the service for life. Whenever the urgency of the public service required it the seamen had no objection to take their turn; but they wished for the establishment of some regulation to prevent their being detained after the emergency had ceased to exist. One great objection to impressment was the expense which it occasioned in tenders, &c.; for the moment a sailor was pressed, he became a prisoner, under a guard, and was divested of all the rights of an Englishman. He was satisfied that the number of desertions which took place during the late war, in consequence of the dis-

453
satisfaction of the seamen, counterbalanced the advantages of impressment; except on one or two emergencies. In behalf of the seamen of England, he protested against their being exposed to a degrading punishment. He intreated those who had the power to introduce an amelioration of the system, to consider, whether it would not be much better to have the fleet manned by volunteers, by men attached to the service, who might be allowed to go on shore without being guarded by officers, from fear of their desertion. The system of punishment ought to be regulated; he would not say abolished, because there were cases in which it was perhaps indispensable. But the objection was to the arbitrary manner in which the punishment was sometimes carried into effect, at the pleasure of an individual who had scarcely arrived at the years of discretion. Many officers were in command whose experience had not taught them the forbearance and self-rule necessary in such a station. In fact an officer on shore, and the same officer on board ship were frequently as different men as it was possible to conceive. When on shore an officer knew that he must govern himself by the rules of society; but when on board, being free from all control, he too often conducted himself in the most arbitrary manner. Man in every situation, and under all circumstances, required control. Unlimited and irresponsible power would always be abused. When boys who were bred up to the sea were daily witnesses of a system of arbitrary authority on the one hand, and of passive obedience on the other, it was not wonderful that, when they themselves became commanders, they should assume despotic power. It was by no means, however, his wish to throw any general censure on the officers of the navy. All he maintained was, that the natural disposition of man to tyrannize over his fellow creatures ought to be as much counteracted as possible. If the Admiralty took steps to effect so desirable an object, they would never want seamen to man our ships. Comparatively speaking, few able seamen were necessary in a vessel. If, out of one hundred thousand men, thirty thousand were able seamen, the ablest officers who had written on nautical subjects agreed that the proportion would be sufficient.
Sir Byam Martinutterly denied that the naval service was unpopular. As a
454
proof of it, the last ship that was put in commission, the Asia, of 80 guns, in three weeks obtained three hundred and seventy volunteers, and in five weeks completed her complement. An hon. member had observed, that the packets had been withdrawn from New York, because the apprehension of punishment induced the men to desert. Now the fact was, that in the whole of the packet service of last year, there had been only three punishments. It was quite untrue that the naval service was unpopular.
Sir J. Newport:— That, then, is an additional argument against the necessity of impressment.
Sir C. Forbessaid, he had heard, that such was the desire of the men engaged in the shipping of the East India company to enter into his majesty's service, that the court of directors had made application to the Admiralty to prevent it. He was one of the last men who would stand up for unnecessary punishments at sea or on shore. He had known some instances of excessive punishment on board ship, which he would not particularize; because, happily, there was an end to such tyrannical proceedings. It was due to lord Exmouth to say that he had introduced regulations on the East India station, which had since been adopted in the whole navy. It was now no uncommon thing for a man of war to make a long voyage, without the occurrence of a single punishment. Had such a circumstance ever taken place on board an Indiaman? If punishments were complained of on board men of war, how much more objectionable must they be on board merchant-ships. But in some cases they were absolutely necessary. If the punishments on board men of war, and the punishments on board merchant-ships were compared, the latter would be found to be the more excessive. The condition and treatment of the sailor on board of a king's ship had of late years been considerably improved; and his majesty's service was now looked to by seamen as most desirable. With regard to impressment the judicious application of a bounty would always ensure a supply of volunteers for the navy, without resorting to a measure which was generally condemned. Bounties were given to induce soldiers to enter the service; and why should they not also be offered as an inducement to man our fleets? Much as

455
we depended on our gallant army in case of war, our chief dependence must of necessity be placed in our navy. He would then say, give double, or even treble bounties to secure a sufficient supply of those brave fellows, on whom the salvation of the country might mainly depend. He was quite sure that the nation would not grudge the additional expense.
Mr. AldermanWood urged the necessity of introducing some regulations respecting impressment, and adverted to various regulations on the subject, which had been adopted by the Corporation of London during the war.
Sir E. Owencontended, that no men were punished on board ship who did not misbehave themselves, and that sailors were never put in irons except in cases of gross misconduct. Gentlemen, in debating upon this subject, argued upon exceptions just as if they were rules. Whenever the infliction of severe punishment came to the knowledge of the Admiralty, investigation was ordered into the circumstances which had occasioned it, and if they were not deemed adequate, the officer ordering the infliction was visited with severe reprehension. He denied that the punishment inflicted in the navy degraded the character of the men. Sailors often admitted the justice of the sentence, after it had been carried into execution. Not only the offence, but the previous character of every man was considered, when he was brought up to the gangway. He would venture to say, that when offences committed at sea were to be punished, the captain being the only indifferent person on board, was the person best qualified to judge of the degree of punishment which ought to be meted out. The offences ordinarily committed by sailors were cither against their officers or against each other. If, then, the offenders were to be tried cither by their officers or by their comrades, they must be tried by the very parties whom their misconduct injured. As a proof of the evil consequences likely to arise from placing the punishment in the hands of the officers, he stated that whilst he was captain, he had felt himself called upon, in almost every case where a man had been tried by court-martial, to diminish the punishment which it inflicted, by full three parts. Much had been said of impressment; but he was convinced that no pecuniary reward would be found an adequate substitute in case of emergency. It
456
was a great mistake to suppose that the king's service was unpopular, it was a gross libel on the British navy to say that the sailors liked the American service better than that of their own country. There had been some instances of desertion to the Americans during the war; but they were very few. He believed that sailors had not that objection to impressment which was commonly supposed. On one occasion a number of men who had been pressed were brought to his ship. The moment they got upon quarterdeck, instead of murmuring at their fate, they said, "You have got us captain; and as you have us, we will enter."
Mr. Fylercontended, that impressment was not only contrary to the spirit of the British constitution, but a disgrace and opprobrium to the British nation. The resolutions were agreed to.