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

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 cases 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. (Hear, hear.)
Admiral DUNCOMBE 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 ho did not
choose to hold, and accordingly he did not move 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 schemes 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 age. 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, where 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, ay an officer of the navy, felt bound
to repudiate the accusation advanced 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. Ho 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 larid 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 hon. 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 be was not prepared to say that
there was not 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 effiL
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, hear.) If the house
would bear these two things in mind it would see how
impracticable was the 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 is 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
Ifl,ooo
lieutenants would not be too many for our navy. ,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
I 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
gallant friend proposed to put men
flow to promotion. His
on the retired list at forty. He (Lord C. Paget) said that
the thing would be cruel to the officers, and would load to
the retired lists 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 hi
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 tho plan of his gallant friend
many young men would be placed on the retired list. He
Idid 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-