The Press.
London, England, 1853-05-28 00:00:00

• , VDMaI.
Taz Docinrasa INQuIRY has at length terminated
a report, which ttse committee have laid before the
• as the result of %heir protracted labours. The
whereon they wtgre commanded to pursue
laseediettoos are dividtd
in tho document into four
Beads :

1. As to the circumstances tinder which 4. ,treutor silti, to the
Superintendents of her Majesty's Doelayaram, thaw! septemher
21$, 1849, was cancelled on the 19th of April, IM2, sinew soy
order or minute of the board.
U. To inquire into the circumstances under which at letter ad-
d by Sir Baldwin Walker to Mr. Stafford, as Se.tretary to
Oil Admiralty, in which letter Sir Baldwin Walker tendered his
rilignation u Surveyor of the Navy, was withheld front the
ZilTo investigate the circtuntabutces connoted with the at-
ent of Mr. James Wells as master smith hi the dockyard
at Portsmouth, the subsequent canc,elling thereof, and the ap-
pointment of Mr. George l'obiell iu lair mead.
IV. Generally to inquire into the exercise of the influence and
patronage of the Admiralty in the dockyards and Government
departments cemented with the several parliwnentary boroughs.
On these several heads the commieee recapitulate
at considerable length the substance of the evidence
given by the various witnesses examined before them.
They observe that the patronage relinquished by the cir-
cular of February, 1847, issued while Lord Auckland
was First Lord of the Admiralty, was solely the pa-
tronage of promotions, and that the board had not
surrendered their right of making the first appoint-
ments. The report then alludes to the circumstances
which occurred after the accession of Lord Derby's
t iovernment, with reference to promotions in the
stockyards, and the complaint of Mr. Stafford, that
great dissatisfaction was felt by his political
friends as to the system of appointments, on the
ground that the patronage was distributed among
their political opponents. The result was, that on the
sth of April Sir B. Walker, the Surveyor, had an
interview with Mr. Stafford at the Admiralty, when
the subject was warmly discussed. The report then
refers to the statement of Sir B. Walker, that Mr.
Stafford observed to him, "It is of no use blinking
the (ideation ; I am so pressed by Lord Derby and
the Chancellor of the Exchequer that I cannot help
myself;" and remarks that Mr. Stafford said that,
though he could not speak as to the precise words
used at the interview, no pressure had been put upon
him either by Lord Derby or the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and that what he had meant was the
pressure put upon him by the members of his party.
A rumour of this evidence having reached Lord
herby and Mr. Disraeli, they attended the meetings
of the committee, and denied having pressed Mr.
Stafford on the subject of patronage, or used language
which could be construed into an indication of a
desire to use such pressure. On this point the rota-
mittee remark that there was a material difference
between the assertions of Sir B. Walker on the one
hand and Mr. Stafford on the other, as to the precise
words which had been used at the interview. Ad-
verting then to the correspondence between Mr.
Stafford and Captain Richards respecting the ap-
pointment of Mr. Ridgway to Chatham obwkyard,
the report states that the committee had been in-
formed by Mr. Stafford that he had made that
appointment on the representation of Sir Frederic
Smith, then a candidate for the representation of
Chatham, that Mr. Ridgway had been passed over
on account of his political opinions, and acting under
the impression that Captain Richards was a violent
political partisan. The committee report that, in
making this appointment. Mr. Stafford did so in
opposition to the views of the intmediate superior
of the subject of it, and without consulting the
Surveyor of the Navy. and that there were no grounds
whatever for his impression of Captain Itiehards's
character.
With regard to the cancelling of the circular of
'IRMO, Mr. Staftbrd stated that he had reason to
believe that that circular lied been issued on the sole
authority of the Secretary of the Admiralty. and
be informed the Duke of Northumberland that 1w
believed he was justifies' in rescinding an order so
made. It appeared to be satisfactorily shown, in the
opinion of the committee. that the circular issued on
the 19th of April. Igsl, which cancelled Sir F.
Baring's circular of 1849. was issued with the consent
of the Fist Lord of the Ailmiralt, given under
an assurance front the Secretary of the Admiralty
that the power of issuing such a circular belonged to
the secretary. The sanction, therefore, of the First.
Lord was given in ignorance. and bet Ore an activate
opinion could he formed of Cie propriety of rescind-
ing the order of Sir F. Baring. The committee had
endeavoured to obtain information as to whether the
enter of 0449 had been honestly carried out, and in
reference to this point the superintendents examined
stated that they had perfect confidence in the im-
partiality of the surveyor's department, and that they
believed the order of 11449 to be an improvement on
the previous practice. There was another important
thing to be considered. namely, whether the officers
who conducted the examinaC s had invariably per-
formed that duty with impartiality? I itt this subject
the committee received conflicting evidence, and Mr.
stated that he had been influenced by reports