The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 25, 1863.

such as to enable the officers to maintain a due position in
*the service. isTow, it seems to me that it is a dangerous
course for this house to assume to itself administrative font
tions. (Cheers,) Anybody who knows anything of ad-
Ministration must know that a multitude of administration's
for any one particular purpose cause confusion. But that
an assembly of 650 gentlemen should be able to administer
the details of any public department is, I think, a proposi-
tion which it is only necessary to state, in order to seo the
impossibility of its application. At the same time I admit
that there may be instances in which it might be fitting, in
the opinion of the house, to address her Majesty's Govern-
ment, with a view to some particular purpose which the
house may think it expedient to accomplish. But in that
case, the house ought to be precise and intelligible in its
recommendations. The resolution ought to be one which
the Executive Government of the day might know how to
carry out if it thought fit to adopt it, or which it might
understand fully and in detail, in order, if it did not
choose to be responsible for it, that it might be able to
take such steps as the circumstances might dictate. But
the resolutions of the hon. and gallant officer, if adopted
to-night, would leave the Government entirely at sea as to
the particular mode of acting upon them. They call upon
us to say that the present system of promotion and retire-
ment is unsatisfactory. W ell, then, what is satisfactory ?
What would the Government have to propose to the house
with the view of making the present system satisfactory ?
Probably the hon. and gallant member would answer, "You
will find that in my speech or my memorandum." (Hear,
hear, from Sir J. Hay.) But his speech and his memoran-
dum
are no part of the decisions of this House of Parlia-
ment—(hear, hear)—they don't appear in our journals; they
are not matters to which the Government could appeal and
say, in the name of the Sovereign, " We have done that
which the House of Commons asked," because the House
of Commons would not have asked anything definite, pre-
cise, or intelligible, which the Government would know to
be the object and purpose of the resolution. The same re-
mark holds good as the second resolution about retire-
ment by age. There is already, to a certain degree, a prac-
tical application of that principle. The hon. and gallant
gentleman wishes the principle to be extended, but he
doesn't say to what limit, in what way, or, in short, give any
clue to enable the Admiralty to know that by doing any parti-
cular thing in that respect they will have accomplished the
wishes of the house. I say, then, that these resolutions are so
vague and indefinite in their terms that, if they were affirmed
by the house, the Government, with the utmost desire to
meet the intentions which the houoo might be ouppozed to
have expressed, would remain perfectly in the dark as to
the mode in which effect should be given to them. (Hear,
hear.) I won't go into the details of that which the Admi-
ralty have already done upon these matters. My noble and
gallant friend the Secretary to the Board, will, I have no
doubt, explain fully to the house all that they have done,
and in what degree the opinions and assertions of the hon.
and gallant officer in regard to the many points of detail on
which he has entered are well or ill founded. But as to the
last resolution, which bears upon pay, I humbly submit that
that is not a proposition which this house would, if well
advised, think it proper to adopt. (Hear, hear.) It does
not even say that the pay ought to be increased ; but there
are words inserted in the concluding paragraph by which
the house would pledge itself to make good the expense of
any of these different propositions, Well, I hold out that it
is not expedient for this house to address the Crown gravely
to make an increase in any department of the public expen-
diture. (Hear, hear) It is for the Executive Government,
upon its responsibility, if it should see fit to do so, to propose
to Parliament such additions to that expenditure as they
may deem necessary for the public service, and it is for this
house to adopt or reject them as it pleases. (Hear, hear.)
But I think the house will agree with me that it is not ad-
visable to address the Crown in these vague expressions,
calling upon it indirectly to make a great increase in our
naval expenditure—an increase which must be followed by
further augmentations of charge in that very same depart-
ment, and which, if carried into effect with regard to the
navy, could not be stopped there, but must be extended to
the army, and even to the civil service also. The hon. and
gallant officer dwelt very much upon a comparison of the
emoluments of certain ranks in the navy with those of the
army and other public departments. Now, as to a compa-
rison with the army it must be borne in mind that the corn-
insiaions in that service are purchased, and that the officers
embark a considerable capital to rise to any high rank,
whereas in the navy the same practice does not obtain. But
in both the army and the navy, if you merely took the in-
comes given to men even in high rank as professional pay,
why, no doubt, every man would wish that they were a
great deal more. But the remuneration to these services
does not consist simply in annual emoluments. (Hear,
hear.) There is the respect which is paid to them in
their several positions—there is the admiration which
the nation feels for the service of which they are
members. And it is not a vain assertion to say
that honours and respect are not an insignificant
element in a requital for public services, because our whole
system is founded upon a contrary assumption. (Hear,
hear.) We reward men by titles and by decorations ; and,
when we come to the highest rewards, you, sir, reward the
most distinguished commanders not by pecuniary emolu-
ment, but by conveying to them from that chair the thanks
of this House of Parliament for the services they have ren-
dered to the country. (Cheers.) The highest recompense
awarded to public men consists of honours showing that
they have entitled themselves to the respect and regard of
their fellow-countrymen. That, therefore, must be borne
in mind when you consider what naval and military officers
receive in return for the personal exposure they undergo
and the deeds they achieve in performing their duty to their
Sovereign. (Hear.) If, then, I cannot concur in the mo-
tion cf the hon, and gallant officer, I feel it incumbent on
me to pursue on this occasion precisely the same course as I
pursued two years ago with regard to the resolution moved
by the hon. and gallant offizer who sits next to him (Sir J.
Elphinstone). The hon. and gallant officer who made the
present motion has referred to what then took place. On
that occasion, resolutions had been carried which involved
not only the question of promotion and retirement, but the
question of pay. The house on being appealed to on a sub-
sequent day rescinded those resolutions, and consented to
refer to a committee then sitting on Admiralty organisation
the question of retirement and promotion. It so happened that
that committee consumed the entire session in taking evi-
dence, and did not make any report. The hon. and gallant
officer says they did thatwhichwas most damaging to the Ad-
miralty ; they reported the evidence they had taken. I might,
perhap3, be allowed to interpret their course upon a different
principle. The ecnumittee was not appointed in any friendly
spirit to the Admiralty. Their examinations were not oon-
ducted with the view of heaping honour and credit upon the
Admiralty. But when they came to the end of their in.
espnowrtatshoevreers,utlhteyorprtuhdeenevtliydeanbesetatihneeyd
fqruoimri opsu,
tatni
ridg theint
os eas sri
had taken. I believe, if they had done so, the report would
have been favourable to the conduct and the organisation of
the department they inquired into. (A laugh.) At all
events, why did they not move to reappoint the committee
in the ensuing session ? (Hear, hear.) If they had thought
the result of the evidence they had taken was so damaging
to the Admiralty as the hon. and gallant officer says, I
should have imagined that pure patriotism, if no other mo-
tive, would have led them, for the sake of the public ser-
vice, to re-establish that committee the following year,with
the view of bringing to a condemnatory conclusion the evi-
dence which he thus characterises. But no such thing.
Last year was allowed to pass away without any re-esta-
blishment of that committee. If it had been so re-esta-
blished it would have gone into those questions connected
with retirement and promotion which it was specially in-
structed to investigate, and which it was not able to do in
1861, because the time did not permit of it. Well sir, I now
propose to do precisely what I did then. As the hon. and
gallant member has brought this question before the house,
if the house thinks it fit that an inquiry should be made
into the existing system of promotion and retirement, her
Majesty's Government have no objection whatever to that
investigation being made, And I would propose that a
committee should be appointed for the specific purpose of
going now into that inquiry which the committee of 1861
could not enter upon. I therefore propose as an amend-
ment to the resolutions of the hon. and gallant officer those
of which I have given notice—that in the first place it is in-
expedient for the house to pronounce an opinion on a ques-
tion of promotion and retirement which has been com-
mitted to a committee, until we shall have received the
report .of a committee on this question, and that a com-
mittee be re- appointed for the purpose of entering on that
investigation. (Loud cheers.) The noble lord concluded
by moving the following resolutions, as an amendment to
the motion of Sir John Hay :
" 1. That this house having, on the 13th day of March,
1861, instructed a select committee to consider the present
system of promotion and retirement in the Royal Navy, is
of opinion that its decision should be suspended until the
sutject shall have been accordingly considered and reported
upon.
"2. That a select committee be appointed to consider
the present system of promotion and retirement in the
Royal navy, and to report their opinion thereon to this
house."

Sir J. ELPHINSTONE said the speech of the noble lord
at the head of her Majesty's Government was like the month
which was about to commence ; he came in like a lion, and
he went out like a lamb. As he (Sir J. Elphinstone) did not
belong to the naval service of the country, the animadver-
sions which he passed upon the navy did not belong to him,
and he stood there as an independent member, and would
speak freely and boldly upon what he considered the wrongs
and grievances of the officers of her Majesty's naval ser-
vice, which cried aloud for inquiry and redress. (Hear.)
The noble lord had stated that the grievances of the Church,
the law, and the civil service were also great. The Church
had many members who were labouring in a good cause
upon inferior incomes ; but two blacks never made a white,
and that was no reason against redressing the grievances of
the navy. With regard to the law, it had many representa-
tives in that house, and it could be shown that it was not in
a very bad state. As for the civil service, its grievances had
been brought before the house year after year until they
had been redressed ; and he thought no complaint would
come from that quarter until the claims of the navy were al-
lowed. He was ready to admit that it was a proud reward
for a naval officer who had distinguished himself to have the
thanks of that house presented to him ; but it was usual
that an event of that kind was accompanied with more sub-
stantial marks of approbation. If the house should
adopt the proposal of the noble lord, he hoped the com-
mittee would be appointed upon a fairer basis than the

former one, which from the first had been damaged in
public estimation on account of the official element which
predominated in it. The grievances of the navy had fre-
quently been brought before Parliament and the country.
It had been the invariable practice of the Admiralty to
allow the grievances of the navy to attain to a point when
it became necessary for the service to take the initiative and
bring them before the country. As far back as 1802 Lord
Nelson had complained of the inadequate pay which was
allowed the officers of the navy—being in many caees less
than that paid to a valet or London footman. Lord Nel-
son concluded a letter on the grievances of the navy by
quoting some lines written at the end of the previous war :
" Our God and sailor we alike adore
In time of danger—not before.
The danger past, both are alike requited ;
God is forgotten and the sailor slighted."
(A. laugh). With regard to the financial state of the ques-
tion. They had been told it was a most serious thing to
come before that house and call upon the country to pledge
itself to a trifling sum for the purpose of giving a compe-
tency to the most valuable officers in her Majesty's service.
As for the parallel which was drawn between naval officers
and those of the army, he could not admit its application.
Officers of the engineers, artillery, the line, and cavalry
were equally eligible to staff appointments, and they fre-
quently obtained those appointments in the Indian ser-
vice. (Rear, hear.)

Admiral DUNCO NIBE said that the noble lord at the
head of the Government stated the reason why the com-
mittee had not made a report was that the evidence was
found to be in favour of the present constitution of the
Admiralty, and that silence was the better discretion of
the two, Let him undeceive the noble lord upon that
point. Owing to the composition of that committee,
everybody knew that it would prove a failure. The
whole of the ex-Lords of the Admiralty were put upon
the committee, and four members from the Ministerial
side were added to it; and although he deprecated from
the beginning that any political bias should be given
to the question, yet no man could fail to see that
it was impossible to expect any result from a
committee in which the official element so largely prepon-
derated. During the first session the committee sat he was
placed in the disagreeable position of public prosecutor of
the Board of Admiralty. That was an office he did not
choose to hold, and accordingly he did not move in the mat-
ter the second year. (Hear, hear.)
Sir R. CLIFTON thought the question was one which
deserved the consideration of the house and as he depre-
cated the extravagant aeliemes of the Government in fortifi-
cations which would turn out to be useless, while they re-
fused to enable officers on foreign stations to dispense the
hospitality which Englishmen were always anxious to do,
he should support the motion of his hon. and gallant friend.
Mr. B. COCHRANE doubted if the navy would be more
contented after the noble lord's speech. He wished to know
if the Government intended to lay down the doctrine that
the officers of the navy had no right to agitate for a redress
of grievances, and were to be content with the honour and
distinction only that attended rank. How was it possible for
a half-pay lieutenant to feel satisfied with honour and dis-
tinction, when he had to feed and support a family on £73
per annum ? The hon. baronet's scheme would be most
satisfactory to the navy, and he deserved their gratitude for
the manner in which he had brought it forward. He con-
sidered it would be unjust to put officers of a certain age out
of active service. There were many instances on record of
ability and vigour in men of advanced ago. He asked if it
was not a fact that many officers had refused to take the
command of ships, because they could not afford it. They
were unable, from the smallness of the pay, to bear the
expense of being in commission, whore they had families
to support. The declaration of Paris had done away with
prize money, and he feared they would have cause to re-
gret it in a future war. He called attention to the bad
system which had caused a delay of six years in the distribu-
tion of the China prize money. The army received advan-
tages to the detriment of the navy; but he did not com-
plain of that. Colonial governorships were now confined to
military men. Even in the brevet on the majority of the
Prinee of Wales the advantage was in favour of the army
over the navy. It was no argument against the justclaims
of the service to say that the energy of the country would
at all times produce sufficient men for the navy. Such a
policy was bad, and deserved condemnation. He hoped yet
to hear that the noble lord at the head of the Government
would adopt the hon. member's suggestions.
Mr. FERRAND supported the motion. He wanted to
know how these men were to obtain redress if they were not
to petition the Board of Admiralty or solicit hon. members
to bring forward their grievances in that house. He spoke
of the cowed spirits of the Devonport Dockyard men, owing
to the tyranny of the Board of Admiralty. The officers of
the navy had petitioned that house for three years, from a
knowledge that a feeling of sympathyexisted towards them,
It was the fear of being in a minority that had induced the
noble lord to assent to this committee, and he (Mr. Fer-
rand) expressed the belief that a fair and honestly appointed
committee would report in favour of the hon. baronet's re-
solutions. He warned the Government not to resist the
just demands of the navy. It was only a few of the great
Whig families who obtained the prizes in the service--men
who had no right to them in comparison with officers whose
services had not been properly recognised. The service was
not fairly treated by the Board of Admiralty.

Mr. R. W. DUFF, although a general supporter of her
Majesty's Government, would support the motion of the
hon. member for Wakefield if it was pressed to a division.
Captain TALBOT, as an officer of the navy, felt bound
to repudiate the accusation advan3ed against the junior
officers of the service by the noble lord at the head of the
Government, that they were influenced by considerations of
self-interest in supporting the present scheme. If the change
were brought about, it would be found that many of those
officers had made great sacrifices in accepting it. He very
much feared that if the committee were re-appointed its
labours would be as purposeless as those of the committee
of the year before last.
Mr. BENTINCK took exception to the composition of
the committee which sat on the constitution of the Board
of Admiralty the session before last, and the result fully
justified his opposition. He moved the rejection from the
committee of all who had served upon the Board of Admi-
ralty, but the house overruled his views. The consequence
was that the time of the committee was taken up listening to
long speeches from members who had been connected with
the board at one time or another, laudatory of the admirable
manner in which the affairs of the Admiralty had been
conducted under their administration; and after seven
months' sitting the committee was unable to make a report.
They had ample evidence then as to what must be the
sequel on this occasion if there sat upon the committee those
who would be judges and jury in their own case. He agreed
with much that had fallen from his hon, friend (Sir J. Hay)
as to the abstract hardship of the way in which officers of
the navy were remunerated for their services ; but at the
same time, with the noble lord at the head of the Govern-
ment, he recognised the inconvenience of dealing with the
question in such a manner. If the house were to pledge
itself to such a resolution, that implied either fresh taxa-
tion or the non-remission of taxation to which the country
was looking forward. Now, to the remission of taxation he
should certainly not feel himself justified in offering a bar;
and therefore he would suggest to his bon. friend to accept
the proposal of the noble lord, and consent to have the mat-
ter referred to a select committee.

Lord C. PAGET said he was not prepared to say that
there was nat at present, or that there might not exist
hereafter a class of officers in the navy which had a fair
claim to higher advantages than those which they had
hitherto enjoyed. But the resolutions of his hon. and gal-
lant friend, although they were perhaps mild enough in
themselVes, were backed by a scheme which appeared to
him the most impracticable and the most unfortunate for
the navy he had ever heard propounded. There were two
things absolutely necessary if they wished to have an effi-
cient navy, They should first of all have a sufficient num-
ber of officers of all ranks to enable them to expand their
force on the sudden outbreak of a war; and, in the next
place, inasmuch as men of unusual activity of mind and of
body were required, it was necessary that they should have
a constant flow of promotion. (Hear, hoar.) If the house
would bear those two things in mind it would see how
impracticable was tho scheme put forward by his
honourable and gallant friend. His honourable and
gallant friend would diminish the active list, and he
would commence with the lieutenants, whom he would
reduce to 700. But he (Lord C. Paget) could assure
the house that if we were called upon to-morrow to man a
squadron of 10 line-of-battle ships he did not know where
a sufficient number of lieutenants could be found for the
purpose. The number of lieutenants was at present 800,
and if that number was reduced to the extent proposed by
his hon. and gallant friend the country would have but a
wretched second-class navy to enable it to encounter the
emergency of a war, if such a calamity should arise. The
fact was that instead of its being advisable they should
reduce the number of lieutenants he believed that 1,000
lieutenants would not be too many for our navy. If, in
addition, they were to reduce the admirals to 60, and the
captains to 250, as proposed by his hon. and gallant friend,
they would stop the whole flow of promotion, , and they
would ruin the navy. He thought his gallant friend must
see that so far as the lieutenants were concerned the scheme
would be perfectly unbearable, though he admitted that by
this scheme a great deal of promotion would be ensured.
Let them look at the number of admirals they had. At the
end of the war in 1816 they had 242 admirals ; 1863 they
had 325. Nobody supposed that this large number was re-
quired for the service of the country. But why was this
increase allowed to take place ? Simply to give necessary
flow to promotion. His gallant friend proposed to put men
on the retired list at forty. Ho (Lord C. Paget) said that
the thing would be cruel to the officers, and would lead to
the retired lista being almost unlimited.
Sir J. HAY said he had only referred to lieutenants.
Lord C. PAGET thought that system would prove im-
practicable, and would at all events lead to vast expense.
England had such multifarious interests to watch over in
every quarter of the globe that she never could consent
to have her naval resources reduced to a par with those of
second-rate naval powers. By the plan of his gallant friend
many young men would be placed on the retired list. He
did not deny, indeed, that his brother officers laboured under
some disadvantages, but the arguments that had been used
would lead one to suppose that the navy was getting worse
and worse, and that they were falling into a " slough of
despond." He did not believe in the discontent that had
been imputed to the officers of the navy, even though cir-

culars had been scattered among them to make them believe
they had grievances. (Hear, hear.) He would state some
of these disadvantages, though he would not call them
grievances, which implied that something was taken away
to which men were enti: led. Take the comparative flow of
promotion now and at the end of the great war. In order to
get a proper flow of promotion they must have fair promo-
tion in the upper as compared with the lower classes. In
1816 there were 4,000 lieutenants, forming 67 per cent. of
the whole list; consequently there were only 33 per cent.
of the classes to which they could rise, therefore they had
small hope of rising. In 1832 there were upwards of 3,000
lieutenants, leaving only 42 per cent. of chances of rising.
In 1848 they had 2,286 lieutenant-, being 53 per cent, of
lieutenants, with 47 per cent. of the higher grades. In 1863
there were 1,177 lieutenants, being 35 per cent., and leav-
ing open to them 65 per cent. of the higher class of the sere
vice. That was a very great improvement, though he should
be glad to see the improvement still greater. What he
wished to shew was that the various schemes adopted from
time to time had greatly improved the condition of the navy.
The disadvantage under which they laboured was that they
were obliged, whether at peace or at war, to promote officers
because they wanted young men. In time of peace officers
used to be kept in the lower ranks, and the only chance of
improving their condition was a great increase in the navy ;
but now they could not be suffered to remain in the
lower ranks, because they were so much wanted in the
higher grades, and when their fleets were tretll they had
small employments for commanders and captains. Com-
paring the naval service with the other branches of the
public service, he thought its averages were quite as good.
If his hon. friend was going to hold out to the navy
that its officers were likely to get a large increase of pay,
he was the worst friend they had. He (Lord C. Paget)
frankly told the navy that he wished them to have
good pay, but if they expected that their pay would be
increased according to the scale of his gallant friend their
hopes would be blasted. He admitted that in some ranks
the French naval officers had higher pay than ours. Let
him compare the case of the navy with the artillery. Take
two youths, one of them entering the navy, the other the
artillery. The one who entered the navy would be educated
principally at the public expense, whereas the one in the
artillery would have to go through an expensive education
at the military academy. The question was what age a man
was when he was promoted. In the navy a young man was
made a lieutenant at 22, and in the artillery he was made a
first lieutenant at 23. A lieutenant in the navy cost £197
full pay, and allowing £l5 for provisions, £lB2 net, while a
first lieutenant in the artillery only received £125, includ-
ing all his allowances. He had been in communication with
the French naval attache at this court, who had communi-
cated to him several facts bearing upon this subject. A-
first lieutenant in the French navy received £144 a year
when abroad, £l2B in France, and £llO in the dockyards.
He denied then that it could be said that our officers were
worse off than the French. At the same time he admitted
that some classes of the French officers were better paid
than ours, but again the admirals were not so well paid.
As soon as a lieutenant in the French service obtained a
command, which was at a later age than in our service, he
might get £4OB, which was better than a lieutenant in our
service, who got only £234. A lieutenant in the French
navy was generally 36, 37, or 39 when he obtained a com-
mand, while the general age in our navy was 32. The
English admirals were better paid than the French admirals.

Sir J. HAY said that in the French navy all the enter-
tainments were paid for.
Lord C. PAGET did not know what might be the cha-
racter of the entertainments in the French navy, but the
admirals had to find their furniture, plate, and linen at their
own cost, but in our navy all these things might be found
on a payment of 5 per cent., and an officer need only take
his portmanteau on board.
Sir J. HAY observed that he must take provision on
board.

Lord C. PAGET.—No such thing. He begged his hon.
and gallant friend not to try to prove too much, There
were cases in which our officers were not so well paid as in
the French navy, but if these figures were quoted, they
must follow the figures through. (Hear, hear.) He did
not wish to complete the comparison, for he could not help
feeling the odiousness of such comparisons. He alluded to
these points not because he did not hope to see the navy
improved, but because ho would not be a party to coming
to that house and saying that the navy were miserably ill-
paid. What had the Government done for the navy ?
They had improved the pay and the position of whole
classes in the navy by the sum of £120,000 a year, and if
it were desired he would enter into particulars—he held a
paper in his hand containing the details, and he hoped that
some honourable member would move for its production.
All classes had been benefited in a small degree. This was
in
_addition to the scheme of retirement of 1860. If
honourable members referred to page 23 of the Dake of
Somerset's memorandum they would see that the charges
for the retired and reserved lists in 1860 was £386,000 ; but
in 1861 it was £120,000. That was due to the order in
council giving power of retirement. The house had
granted, in three years and a half, at the instigation of the
Admiralty, £150,000 a year dead weight to the coun-
try. Was it fair for his honourable and gallant friend
to charge Jim and the Admiralty with neglecting the
interests of the navy, and to instigate the officers to
discontent by issuing elongated shells, which pierced the
sides of the Warrior and all our ships. (Laughter.) If
his honourable and gallant friend had come forward and
made known any grievances under which the navy suf-
fered, he or any other officer would have been well re-
ceived at the Admiralty. The hon. member for Devon-
port (Mr. Ferrand) said that officers could not go to the
Admiralty. (Hear, hear.) Why the authorities at the Ad-
miralty would be delighted to see and to serve them. The
retired officers laboured under the idea that when they ac-
cepted that position they were entitled to an increase of pay.
The right hon. gentleman the member for Portsmouth (Sir
F. Baring) was at the head of the Admiralty when the alte-
ration was made, and he was not a man to countenance any-
thing involving bad faith. He was surprised to hear any
hon. gentleman say that the noble lord at the head of the
Government was trying to shelve this question by the
course he had ptirsued, and he hoped that idea would not be
shared in by the house. The navy, at any rate, would not
believe it, but would rest sure that after what the noble lord
said there would be an inquiry into the alleged disadvan-
tages under which the navy laboured, which would be con-
ducted with fairness and justice. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that the speech they had just
heard had been directed rather to details, on which the
house was not asked to pronounce an opinion, than to the
broad principles submitted in the motion. He must con-
gratulate the hon. member for Wakefield on having at last
elicited from a reluctant Government a distinct admission
that he was practically justified in the course he had taken.
His hon. and gallant friend was not open to the censure
passed upon him by the Prime Minister, but the course he
had taken reflected honour and credit upon him ; and as an
officer of the Royal navy he could not have taken a more
honourable, dignified, and natural course than to speak in
person on behalf of his brother officers, and to ask for tho
redress of the grievances of which they had long com-
plained. Nor was the honourable member open to the
objection taken to his motion on the ground of its al-
leged vagueness. If he had encumbered his motion
with those details which had been referred to,
nobody would have been more ready than the noble
viscount to say that such details were only to be dealt
with by the executive. lie was desirous to call attention
to the history of the question, which dated from the time
that he was called upon to administer the Admiralty,
when he found the service in a most unsatisfactory condi-
tion. During his short tenure of office he recommended
the appointment of a Royal Commission to consider how
they might improve the manning of the navy ; and it
would be admitted, en all hands, that the results of the
inquiry had been most satisfactory. Finding the state of
the service in regard to promotion and retirement most un-
satisfactory, he prepared a plan of promotion which was
adopted by the Cabinet, and which, if he had stayed in
office a few months longer, would have been carried into
effect, It was founded on the broad principle of the motion,
that of retirement by ago applicable to all ranks of the ser-
vice. He left a memorandum with the present First Lord
of the Admiralty, imploring him not to regard it in any
rash light, but to look at it as an endeavour to improve the
service ; but the noble duke did not see fit to carry out that
plan or any plan founded on the same principle, In the
following year, 1860, as the government was unwilling to
act as an executive, he moved for the appointment of a
Royal Commission on promotion and retirement ; but on a
division the motion was rejected. In 1861 the hon. mem-
ber for Portsmouth moved for a committee, and the Prime
Minister resisted the motion—(hear, and cheers)—divided
against it, and was beaten—(hear)—but now he approved of
a committee. (Hear.) The course of the government had
been inconsistent and injudicious; and he must say that
the position of the government was more extraordinary
than the position of any government since he had been a
member of that house. (Hear, hear.) They seemed to
be afraid of bringing forward any measure—(hear, hear)—
they seemed to be afraid of grappling with any difficult sub-
ject. The administration of the criminal law had fallen
into a state so feeble and unsatisfactory that the whole
country cried out against it; and the executive, instead of
improving that administration, said, " Let us have a com-
mission." Now that they found the naval service was not
disposed to be trifled with any longer, and that the service
was supported by a strong feeling in the house, they changed
their tactics, and said, " Let us have a committee." A
select committee was the worse means of dealing with the
question, which ought to be taken up by the executive, or,
in default, by a Royal commission. He supported the mo-
tion for a committee two years ago, because the Govern-
ment had refused a commission, and had refused everything
else, saying that there was no necessity for either inquiry
or improvement. On this occasion, the day after the hon.
member for Wakefield gave notice of his motion, there was
laid on the table a memorandum of the Duke of Somerset,
which admitted that there were undoubtedly many ques-
tions connected with the pay and position of naval officers
deserving further consideration. This was the first time the
admission had been made by the present Admiralty ; but
this memorandum and the speech of the noble lord were
inconsistent, for two years ho raised the point that it was
unconstitutional to refer the question of the pay of the navy
to a committee of the house. k Hear.) He wished to guard
himself against being supposed to agree with the hon. mem-
ber for Wakefield in all the details of his plan, but he en-

tirely subscribed to the principlt of retirement by age, and
to the opinion that the pay of ttio required readjust-
ing. The expressions which the lam,member for Honiton
had quoted as having been used by 1.4412 in the debate of
1860 were taken from the report of the well -known commis •
sion of 1840, which was presided over by the ...Mike of Wel-
lington, which recommended an increase in t,.110 sea pay
allowed to navy lieutenants, and which iThelared, as Go-
vernment would do well to remember, " If yoLi W41,,t the
naval service to be efficient, you must render it contented,
Refusals of command had been made to himself when its
office; and he remembered a remarkable case, in which az.
able and distinguished officer, after 24 hours' consideration,
of the offer of a command, said "I am much obliged. I
cannot afford to take it." Another officer of great distinc-
tion once wrote to him that he could not afford to take an
active command without doing injustice to his family, and
he added that he knew many others who were similarly
situated. He would ask the Admiralty if it were true or not,
as he had heard, that the gallant admiral who was appointed
to succeed Sir Jas. Hope in China was likely :to resign the
command on pecuniary grounds, and, further, that the pre-
sant Board of Admiralty had already applied to some four
or five flag officers
.to succeed that officer, and that they
had been unable to get one to succeed him. Was it true
that some of the officers in command of the finest ships in
the Mediterranean had applied to come home and resign
their commands as soon as they had ;served their time ?
Those were facts or not, and he was sure that there was no
man in the house to whom it was le -8 necessary to point
out than the noble lord at the head of the Government that

such facts were not to the honour of her Majesty's service.
The noble lord might tell them of the honour of serving
the Crown, and he might tell them of the honour of receiv-
ing the thanks of that house, but he would put it to the
ble lord whether it was the honour of the service or the
efficiency of the service in any portion of it to see the best,
and bravest, and most experienced men unable to afford to
accept commands. (Hear.) He would entreat the house
and the Government gravely to consider these facts, and
gravely to consider the point at which they had arrived. No
doubt the present Board of Admiralty were sincere in their
belief that no great or serious change was necessary,—but
the noble lord had entirely changed his course, for he was
now ready to grant the committee which two years ago he
refused. The Duke of Somerset had entirely changed his
course, for he had been for four years insisting that no
change was necessary, and he now came forward with a
frank admission that with regard to pay and promotion a
change was necessary. Perhaps, after what had fallen from
him (Sir J. Pakington) it was hardly necessary for his hon.
and gallant friend to press his motion, but if he did so, he
(Sir J. Pakington) would feel it his duty to vote with him.
But he would suggest to his hon. and gallant friend, as the
question had so materially changed, whether his hon. and
gallant friend would not best discharge the duty he had so
properly undertaken and so well performed, by not pressing
the motion to a division, and he would suggest to the noble
lord in that case whether he would not be disposed to recon-
sider the proposal for a committee, and he would submit to
the noble lord whether it would not be better, after the ad•
mission of the Government, that they should themselves
undertake this question. That would be the more constitu-
tional course, and be the most conducive to the interest and
welfare and the improved efficiency of her Majesty's navy.
Sir C. WOOD could not concur in many of the statements
put forth by the right hon. gentleman, and it struck him
as not a little remarkable that the right hon, gentleman
should find fault with a committee, when he himself had
appointed a royal commission. When he had been First
Lord of the Admiralty all interference with the dockyards
were surrendered completely to the superintendent, and the
Admiralty had nothing to do with the promotion or employ-
ment of the people in the dockyards from that time forth.
No better proof could be given of the independence of the
men than the fact that at the last election in Devonport the
lord of the Admiralty who was a candidate was defeated by
a large majority, a great number of the men in the dock-
yards voting against him. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. HAY replied—After the appeal which had been
made to him, and considering the admission made on the
part of the Government, he would not press his motion to a
division. But now that the noble agreed to a committee,
he trusted it would be one in which the house and the ser-
vice would have confidence. (Hear, hear.)
The motion was then withdrawn, and the amendment of
Viscount Palmerston agreed to.
SECURITY FROM VIOLENCE.
Mr. ADDERLEY moved for leave to bring in a bill for
providing for the future security of the persons of her Ma'
jesty's subjects from violence. The right hon. gentleman
stated that the principal object of the bill was to have offences
of this kind visited with corporal punishment.

Sir G. GREY assented to the introduction of the bill,
but did not pledge himself to support its principle. It had
been decided that flogging should be abolished except in
two or three instances, and it was for the house to well con'
Sider the subject before it retraced its steps. If it was to be
left to the judges, past experience showed them it would
not be enforced, and he thought there would be a repug-
nance on the part of juries to convict where corporal punish-
ment was to be inflicted. The right hon. gentleman bad
not very accurately defined to what offences the punishment
was to be applied ; indeed it would be very difficult to dray
the line of distinction. If it was the most effectual punish'
ment, let it be applied to all cases under certain restriotiono,
No doubt in the army and in gaols it was the most prompt
and effectual punishment under certain circumstances.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
REMUNERATION TO JURORS.

Mr. AYRTON obtained leave to introduce a bill for the
remuneration of jurors in certain cases.

WRITS PROHIBITION.

Mr. E. P. BOUVERIE obtained leave to introduce a
bill to prohibit the issue of writs for actions of debt in the
superior courts for stuns of less than £2O. _

BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND NOTICES (METRO'

POLIS) BILL.
Sir G. GREY obtained leave to bring in a bill to Make
provision concerning bills of exchange and promissorY
notes payable in the Metropolis on the 7th day of March
next, the day on which the Princess Alexandra will arrive
in this country.