The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 28, 1864.

too much reason, against our naval authorities.

While the votes are censured as unnecessarily

arge, and the expenditure condemned as preposte-

rously lavish, it is at the same time contended
that the officers and seamen of the Royal Navy are
the most inadequately remunerated of any class of
public servants. This is the more unreasonable, as
in no department of the administration do English*
men take more pride than in the navy, and no
amount is begrudged to it if fairly required for any
purpose of the service. Least of all is it the
national wish that men who follow an arduous
and hazardous profession, and the value of whose
services to the country are so great and conspia
cuous, should be stinted in their receipts, kept for
a long term of years in a position which in many
cases is scarcely raised above absolute poverty.
Such, for instance, would in these days be the
position of a married lieutenant in receipt of the
magnificent income of £lBO, and unfortunately
most of the inferior grades of the service could
supply similar examples. The fault of all this
seems to lie rather with the system than with any
particular individual or party, and while in most
other instances continual complaint and well-
founded opposition have at last brought about the
desired reform with regard to the Admiralty, and
all belonging to it, matters are left pretty mush as
they were. Some faint indications of better days
are occasionally visible, and from time to time
some of the most grievous abuses are discussed, if
not remedied. On Thursday evening Lord
CLARENCE PAGET brought for ward a question of
considerable importance in the Committee of
Supply, and his proposal, although incomplete and
partial in its nature, and subjected to severe
scrutiny and considerable censure, was nevertheless
a step in the right direction. The noble lord moved
for a supplementary estimate for the pay of the
Nagy, with a view of remedying some of the exist-
ing deficiencies. Lord C. PAGET proceeded to
show that the receipts of naval officers had been
much diminished of late years, owing to the loss of
two sources of emolument—the prize money ob
tainable in time of war, and the freight that was
formerly received on the carriage of gold. In con-
sequence of the changes in these respect the pay of
the navy is, according to Lord C. PAGEI"S testimony,
very inferior to what it was in the days of a former
generation. The petty officers are not paid so highly
as the same class of men in the merchant service,
and most foreign nations make more liberal allow-
ances for their superior officers than we do. Lord
CLARENCE PAGET entered at some length into a
careful explanation of the various additions which
he proposed to make to the pay and allowances of
the different grades of officers and petty officers.
He gave also some explanation of the inconvenis
ences arising from the changes of 1860, when it
was ordered that officers arriving at the age of 60
should retire nolens volens—a determination which
was taken with the view of assisting promotion,
and of securing a more active class of flag officers.
The noble lord, after concluding his observations,
moved that a sum of £55,266 be granted for in.
creasing the full pay of executive officers of the
navy. With very few exceptions the speakers
who followed approved of the principle which he
advocated, and readily admitted the necessity for
increased liberality, but considerable exceptions
were taken to many parts of the official scheme.
It contains many inequalities, and is, on some
points, very unsatisfactory, but we are surprised
that Lord C. PAGET should have failed to remedy
one of the most glaring pieces of injustice in the
service. We allude to the regulations respecting
the promotion of masters. Sir LAWRENCE PALK
in animadverting upon this unaccountable neglect,
remarked that this valuable body of officers ap.
peered to be the only ones of all the ship's crew
who were diequalfied frow receiving marks of
.oral approbation for distinguished services, and

in support of this assertion he cited the case of
Mr. Roberts, a master in the Royal Navy, who,
during the Crimean war, commanded the
Cyclops while in action, and performed many
other signal services. The same gentlemen,
it will be remembered, displayed remark-
able ingenuity and promptitude on one im-
portant occasion, when the senior officers were
puzzled how to disembark the troops, and Sir L.
PALK might have instanced that occasion as a
proof of the sound practical ability so often pos-
sessed by these officers. Yet from one of those
official prejudices which so often keep back merit
in this country, they have never been fairly treated.
Their pay is very inadequate, their chance of pro-
motion nil, for what reason, save routine, it would
be difficult to say. The very order of June, 1863,
which professed to redress their grievances by con-
ferring upon masters who had served 15 years the
rank of staff commander, without additional pay,
placed them, in all cases, junior to the lieutenants
and, as Sir L. PALK justly observed, a man who'
had served with credit for many years might natu-
rally feel aggrieved at being placed, perhaps, under
a youth who know nothing of the service. Why
should the masters be deprived of the power of
rising in the service ? Why should they of all
men in the Navy be restricted to the one particular
office when in so many instancesthehyigaherer ofitnaens ?
and
proper persons for holding much
This is so glaring an injustice that we agree with
Mr. DUFF in finding it difficult to understand how
the noble lord who introduced this measure of so-
called reform could have possibly overlooked it.
Why should the pay of the masters be so dispro-
portionate to that of other officers, so that
after twenty years' service a paymaster
receives £6OO, and a master £328 ? Why
when men are flund capable of performing
great public services in a time of difficulty and
trial should those services be altogether overlooked
because they happen to hold the rank of masters.
Mr. ROBERTS, whose case we have mentioned, was
entirely unrewarded for his exertions during the
Crimean War, we believe to his great disappoint-
ment. This is not the way to induce able and
energetic men to enter our navy or to keep them
there. There can be no greater mistake than to
discourage any class of public servants—to give
them the conviction that whatever services they
may render, or however great may be their zeal
for the public good, no mark of favour or of re-
cognition will be accorded to them. The very men
who are most calculated to be valuable officers
will be the ones moot quickly disgusted with a
system which cramps their energies and fetters
their laudable ambition. Men of talent and spirit
will be slow to enter a profession in which not
only they have but a small chance of rising, but
causerise,Aaunscisct
eEeewTsr
for
o or taf
seemsepivpnte
eho
ir a
aturot hr
fihyet
have
r usn e
to
oi s
p.
an absolute certainty of not being permitted to
relsVenetcomnfueeshs the
flag
on
odgffiivcaeetnrt estnut it
hooni
wsthan
pha t thih,yeri r
dg r
Cie.

MDLLE. BETTLEHEIM, the contralto who is so
successfully making her way at Her Majesty's
Theatre, is a pianist of mark as well as a singer. She was
born, says a Vienna paper, on June Ist, 1845, at Pesth ; was
educated as a pianoforte player ; and made a successful debut
as such in 1861. That she has not forgotten a branch of
the art so valuable to a vocalist was proved by her per•
formance at Herr Pauer's concert last week, where she
joined the concert-giver in a duet for two pianofortes, and
was as much applauded in her character of instrumentalist
to for ber singing,—The Reader.