The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-25 00:00:00

(Hear.) Now, as regards the education of our seamen.
(Hear.) Ought not our men to be educated as well as any
men of a similar class in this country? (Hear, hear.) I

the full number is enrolled the coat willnot quite reach that I
amount. That £l3, however, does not include any provi-
sion for pensions, The Royal Commission recommended
that a sum of money should be taken every year to be ap-
plied to the formation of a pension fund. The Government
considered that scheme, but its advantages were not found
to be such as to warrant its adoption. If we assume that
the proportion of men obtaining pensions will be the same
on the reserve as among the seamen of the navy, the cost of
pensions will average about £2 per man per annum. That,
of course, is merely speculation, because as yet none of the
men in the reserve have arrived at the age at which they
become entitled to pensions. I cannot pass from this sub-
ject without alluding to that vast scheme for officering the
reserve which the house approved last year. lam glad to
be able to inform the committee that the finest and best
officers of the merchant service are flocking into our
rants. They are ambitious of serving their country, and I
oielieve that we shall shortly have as many officers as we
are authorised by Parliament to engage. It, therefore,
becomes a most important question as to what is to
be the future of these reserves, especially as concerns their
officers. Government have done everything that could be
done in the way of giving full opportunities for drill—that
is to say, by establishing at the principal ports drill ships,
superintendents of drill, and all that is requisite for that
purpose, But what we can do in that respect must ever be
limited to manuaLexercise at the gun. That which is essen-
tial to make a real gunner is target practice, and for that it
is impossible that the Government can provide. I think it
would be worthy of consideration in the future whether,
when one of these officers has studied the higher branches
of gunnery, has proved himself competent to manage a gun,
and has got a crew of naval reserve men, we might not sup-
ply a gun to his ship, exactly as they are supplied to the
Volunteer Artillery upon the coast. (Hear.) I throw
that out for future consideration, because it is of immense
importance that yon should teach your gunners. If they
are to be useful in action they must have been taught to
fire at a target ; manual exercise can only be a very incom-
plete instruction for a gunner. I have stated that we have
to-day more than 10,000 Naval Volunteers, we have like-
wise of Coast Volunteers 8,000. Taking the total reserve
force available for the defence of the country, irrespective
of the fleet which is afloat, we have 40,800 men ready to go
on board our ships if any emergency required their pre-
sence. And in making that statement I have made the
proper deductions for the men belonging to the naval re-
serve who are on distant stations, and therefore could not
be counted upon within, say, six mouths. Adding to this
number our force in commission, we have a total force of in
round numbers 95,000 men. I believe that we are at last
approaching a satisfactory state as regards our force afloat
and our reserve. (Hear, hear.) I now turn to another
matter which is of vital and growing interest—the force of
boys which is maintained as a nursery for the navy.
We maintain, at the present time, 9,500, of whom 6,500
are in the fleet, 500 are in the Coast-guard ships, and
2,500 are in the training ships. We have at the pri-
cilial ports five training ships, on board of which are
2,500 boys, and attached to these ships are four
brigs, on board of which the lads are taken to practise them
in seamanship.
Sir I. PA h INGTON.—Are the five training ships of the
class recommended by the Commission ?
Lord C. PAGET.—Yes, certainly, they are line-of-battle
ships ; the Caledonia is one. These boys will, I believe,
become a most superior class of sailors. They are well
educated, and will turn out.some of the most valuable men
in the fleet, but they are very costly. I desire to impress
this cost upon the committee, because we are daily receiving
requisitions from the great merchant ports, asking the
Government to undertake the education of their boys.
(Hear.) The Admiralty are fully sensible of the importance
which is to be attached to the education of boys in the mer-
chant navy, but. seeing how heavy our Naval Estimates
are, I think that we are perfectly right in deferring sthat is
called the second boy scheme of the Royal Commission un-
til we can show some greater reduction in our normal ex-
penses. These boys—and again if any hon. member chooses
to move for the detailed return, which will be found very
interesting, I shall be glad to lay it upon the table—cost us
nearly £45 per head per annum. The annual cost of each
boy is within £5 of that of a marine, and within £l5 of that
of a seaman in the fleet. It is interesting to inquire how
many seamen these boys supply per annum. We calculate
that the waste of boys from discharge, death, desertion, and
other causes, amounts to about 7 per cent. per annum ; and
taking the average period of training at three years and a
half—they enter from 14 to 18—it gives us in round num
hers 2,500 boys per annum becoming seamen for the sup-
ply of the Royal Navy. (Hear, hear.) It is very remark-
able what a small proportion of the whole number borne,
on the books is formed by the petty officers andlisamen.
Out of a total force of 76,000, including the Coastguard,
we have only 40,000 petty officers and seamen. Million.
friend the member for Lambeth, who takes an interest in
the subject of corporal punishments, will be glad to hear
that there has been a reduction in the number of deser-
tions in the navy ; so that, instead of taking 12 per cent.
for waste, as I did when I brought this subject before the
committee last year, I need only take 11 per cent. this year.
(Hear.) On the force of 40,000 the percentage would there-
fore be about 4,400. Of these vacancies 2,500 are supplied by
boys, leaving 1,900 seamen to be obtained from other sources.
These details are important when considering hove far we
_ ought to carry the boy system—a subject which has much
engaged the attention of the Admiralty. Snowing the fine
class of boys we can turn out, this deficiency is very tempt-
ing; but the question is, ought we not to keep up a steady
flow of seamen from the merchant service, in order that the
distance and difference between us may vanish and be over-
come ? (Hear, hear.) The Admiralty therefore consider the
number of boys to be very much st hat is required for feed-
ing the navy. As we are now happily at peace, and as I
trust things on all sides look as if we need no longer enter-
tain apprehensions of war, I think this may be a moment
when the house will permit me to make some few remarks
with regard to the condition of the seamen. My lamented
friend Lord Herbert, when he brought forward his Esti-
mates, used yearly to devote a considerable time to inform-
ing the committee how the soldiers fared in health, in posi-
tion, and in prospects. A most important indication of the
state of the navy lies in the health of the seamen. We have
returns of the mortality of the fleet. The death-rate per
thousand is in some respects satisfactory, but in others, I
am sorry to say, such is not the case. As regards the home
station, the average is not above that of other public ser
vices—the police, soldiers, and so on ; it is about 10 per cent.
annually. But I regret to say that at some of the stations the
death-rate has been very high—as high as 60 per cent.
(Sensation.) These, lam bound to say, were exceptional
cases, such as in the Chinese war, where the men were sub-
ject to great exposure. But the average on the whole of the
navy is about 16 yer cent. per annum. The Admiralty have
been led seriously to consider whether some improvement
might not be made—in regard, first of all, to the food of the
seaman, and likewise with respect to the ventilation of their
sleeping places. (Hear, hear.) We have had a committee
sitting some time, and the result has been that the Admi-
ralty have decided to adopt every possible means of improv-
ing the ventilation of the ships. Hon. gentlemen who
have been on the lower deck of a frigate or line-of-battle
ship when the men are asleep will admit that the atmo-
sphere there is enough to pi evoke any kind of disease.
(Hear, hear.) We have received reports from some of the
large ships in the Mediterranean, showing that fatal dis-
eases, phthisis, and fevers, are but too prevalent; and a
principal cause of these is the crowded state of the decks.
This leads me to advert to what several gentlemen—my
gallant friend the member for Devonport among others—
alluded to as taking place, the reduction of the complement
of men in her Majesty's ships. We propose as a tentative
measure that on board of certain large ships in the fleet the
complement should be reduced in the following propor-
tions :—ln line of battle ships from 880 to 800 men; in
some of the frigates from 570 to 510 ; in the smaller fri-
gates from 350 to 310. The House last year, at the sugges-
tion of the Admiralty, allowed an establishment to be
formed at Deptford where beef could be both killed and
cured in our victualling yard. The operations there car-
ied on have been productive of the greatest comfort to the
seamen, but it is right to tell the House that its generosity
to the navy has not been unattended with expense. The
- additional cost of providing first-rate beef is itself consider-
able. The meat now purchased would be fit for any gen-
tleman's table, and contrasts forcibly with the old " maho-
ell" we were used to in our young days. (A laugh.)
Both officers and men will now have very good corned
"'et There are other measures which the Admiralty are
desire
it''
to be of carrying out, but these are matters requiring
and handled with the utmost consideration, delicacy,
cats, because we know that seamen are always
somewhat en„..ido
beetuinthofe the Admiralty. Ever since last
century it
practice in the navy for seamen
to receive allowances for savings of provisions. But this
Starvation. (Hear.) Instead of being
well fed, as we uenssirethem to be, and as growing boys
especially require to
lese latter, who are obliged to
submit to the rules theirof
ysess, together with the men,
actually save so much
out
of their food in order that they
may spend the amount oa shore, The Medical Director-
General of the Navy has reported
men
it would be greatly
conducive to the health of tbs,
system, which is connected with Calf by any means that
therefore surrounded with great diffieTtiof the navy, and
pay
pay of theof
allowances
ready i s
away with. I have often stated that thees, could be done
above £3 a-month, taking into account all
they receive, and therefore higher than the
chant service, though sailors in the latter will not believe it,
One
can easily understand how this old .fathiotted system
grew out of the wants of the day. The payments
to men
for their savings of provisions were very natural when the
resources of the country were limited, and it wee difficult to
rovisioes ; but there is no similar object to be
purchase P
gained in the present day. I do trust, therefore, that
whether by the present Government or by that of my hen*
friend opposite some new schema may be devised by which
the men may be paid on a more simple plan, so that they
will really know what they aro .receiving. Another in-
stance of the improving condition of our sailo s is that
h
r tey
have baked bread at sea, just as good as any gentleman can
have in London or Paris. (Hear.) It is very desirable to
afford the seamen soft bread instead of keeping them always
on biscuit. I speak in this way to show the committee that
we aro alive to the deficiencies, and that things aro gradu-
ally improving. We have received reports stating that the
greatest benefits had resulted fi om the distilling apparatus,
which enables the men in the fleet to have pure water

can assure the committee that that desire of the governing
body in the navy is that they shoul i be. It is quite true
that education has hitherto been given, but we called for
returns on the subject and could get none. We have had
schoolmasters for a great number of years, but in most
cases they were men of an inferior class, and the scholars
could not have been expected to make much progress. How-
ever, we have applied to the Treasury lately for the means
of appointing schoolmasters of a superior class, and we trust
that education in the navy will be greatly improved. (Hear,
hear.) The Second Lord of the Admiralty has undertaken
to gather in all the statistics on this subject, in order that we
may be in a position to judge of the results of the improved
system. (Hear, hear.) I cannot pass over another subject
—namely, desertion. (Hear.) I hold in my hand a very
interesting return, to which I beg to call the attention ofb the
committee. It shows that a gradual improvement has been
taking place, aad that that improvement has not been
checked since 1857, except in the year following that in
which the large bounty was given. In 1857 the desertions
amounted to 5 per cent. ; in 1858 they fell to 41 ; in 1859 to
4 ; in 1860 they jumped up to 51, but in 1861 they hadfallen
to 31. (Hear, hear.) From this return the committee will
perceive that the desertions had fallen one-half per cent.
each year with the exception of the year 1860. The high
bounty was given in 1859, and in that year many fellows
joined who ran away in the winter and spring following.
One more return and I will relieve the committee of this
branch of the subject. Corporal punishment in the navy
has also been on the decrease. (Hear, hear.) In 1857 it
was administered to 3 per cent. of the numbers in the fleet ;
in 1858 to 2i ; in 1859 to 2 ; in 1860, the date of the last
return, to only 1 1-3 d. (Hear.) I think that is satisfactory;
but hon. members may wish to know the cause of the de-
crease in corporal punishments. (Hear, hear.) I may say
it is to be found partly in the fact that superior men are
coming in, but it may also be traced to the disinclination of
officers to inflict corporal punishment. (Hear, hear.) We
are to some extent substituting imprisonment for corporal
punishment, butunderexisting arrangements imprisonment
has its disadvantages, for by imprisonment in the ordinary

gaols many a fine seaman is thrown into contact with
immoral characters, who send him back contaminated.
(Hear.) What the Admiralty wish for is a naval prison,
governed by naval officers, and entirely under our own
eye. (Hear.) We expect that out of such a prison men
will come back to us improved instead of demoralised. I
can assure the house that the subject of naval barracks has
not been lost sight of. My hon. friend the member for
Portsmouth (Sir J. Elphinstone) has come down primed to
attack the Secretary to the Admiralty on this point—
(laughter)—but Ido not think that my hon. friend can
have looked into the estimates. We admit the utility of
such establishments ; but with respect to this subject also
we bear in mind the Italian proverb—Chi va piano va sane.
(Hear.) We propose to commence with the construction of
a barracks at Devonport. No doubt my hon. friend would
rather we began at Portsmouth. (A laugh.) This question
of barracks is one of immense interest. My late gallant
friend Sir C. Napier asked for barracks in order that our
seamen might not be kept for four or five months aboard
hulks while waiting to be put aboard their ships, but I must
remind the committee that we fit out our ships in a week
now. Therefore, on that ground we have no need for bar-
racks, but we want them in order that our men may have
a tour on shore. (Hear.) It would be very desirable to
put them in barracks to go through a tour of duty, instead
of having them drunk about the streets of a town. (Hear.)
They would become more civilised, and we could accustom
1 them to duty. When we accomplish that, what will fol-
low? The organisation of the navy. (Hear.) What the
navy wants is organisation. Hon. gentlemen may have
read Sir F. Grey's pamphlet on the subject. I am not bound
to kis or to any other particular scheme, but I do say that
the navy wants to be organised. When our frigates went
out men were put aboard of them; but, to use the expres-
sion of an hon. member, they were " chucked " aboard.
Now, what we want is that they should know their ships,
and that is what the hon. baronet (Sir J, Elphinstone)
wants. I now turn to the question of ships. I laid on the
table of the house some few days ago a return showing all
the ships now afloat and building. Hon. members may
have read that return ; but it will be interesting to the
public to know that on the Ist instant the number of screw
ships of the line afloat was 57, and the number on the stocks
4, giving a total of 61. The number of frigates was—screw,
37 afloat and 7 on the stocks ; paddle 9, making a total of 44
screws and 9 paddles. I will not detain the committee by
enumerating all the smaller vessels ; but the grand total of
our steam fleet was 580, composed of 525 afloat and 55 build-
ing or on the stocks. I think that my hon. friend the mem-
ber for Lambeth (Mr. Williams) will admit that that is
value for our money. (A laugh, and hear, hear.) We now
come to the question of the reduction of the armament of
the ships, and I entreat the attention of hon. gentlemen to
this subject. The Admiralty receive from various officers
reports that those very long steamships, with engines in the
centre, are liable to straining, and that in a great degree.
Now I know that some gentlemen, and among them naval
officers, are of opinion that this straining is attributable to
the ships being overmasted. I am not prepared to say that
this is not the case in some instances ; but what is manifest
is this—that they are over-weighted. Another thing which
the Admiralty have to consider is that we have introduced
Armstrong guns. Now, that means this—that you will
mount a few guns carrying heavy shot. It is found that a
100-pounder striking a vessel does more damage than two
50-pounders. That is the principle. Our ships, to make
any impression against iron-plated vessels, require very
heavy guns—in fact, you might as well throw marbles
against their iron sides as shots of any smaller calibre. It
was therefore necessary for the Admiralty to reconsider the
armament of ships. But again our presentclassof ships carry
nominally a great number of guns, but a great many of these
guns are utterly useless. You dare not fire them except
right abeam, for fear of doing damage to the rigging. They
will not trail in the least, and it is absolutely necessary
on that account that we should get rid of some of these
guns. Consider what an immense advantage it is to your
ship if you can lighten your weight of guns and gun car-
riages, and if you can keep up something like the weight of
shot thrown from your broadside. The result is, and I
repeat it is a tentative measure, that the Admiralty have
determined to try the experiment of reducing the
armament of some ships of each class. My right
hon. friend (Mr. Corry) has moved for a return which will
show in detail the reduction of the armament in every ship,
but it may be interesting that I should inform the house of
some of the changes made. The Revenge class of 91-gun
ship is the last I ype of the line-of-battle ships of our navy.
The original armament before the introduction of the Arm-
-1 strong gun was 34 8-inch guns of 65 cwt., 36 32-pounders
of 56 cwt., 20 32 •pounders of 45 cwt., and one 68-pounder,
making a total of 91 guns. The weight of these guns was
533 tons. (Mr. Corry—lncluding the gunners' stores ?)
Yes. The weight of the guns of the Revenge class of ships
—guns and gear—was 533 tons, carrying a broadside of
1,7801 b. weight. The present scheme gives no 8-inch guns
of 65 cwt., 32 32-pounders of 56 cwt., two 33 -pounders of
45 cwt., six 40-pounder Armstrong guns, and a 100-
pounder pivot Armstrong gun. So that the weight, instead
of being 533 tons, will only be 438 tons, being a saving of
100 tons in weight. Consider what a relief it is fora ship
to have 100 tons taken off her decks. (Hear, hear.) It is
true we sacrifice the weight of the shot of the broadside.
(Sir J. Pakington—Hove many guns on the old and new
principle P) Seventy-one guns against 91, being a reduc-
tion of 20 in the complement of guns. We lose, I admit,
the difference in the weight of the broadside between
1,7801 b. as against I,4Bolb.—that is to say, we lose 3001 b.
in the broadside. (Hear, hear.) But that is made up by
the advantage of having a few very heavy shot. I will
not trouble the house any further on this head, as a
full return on the subject has been moved for
by my right hon. friend. I ought here to allude to
what has been said by my hon. friend the member
for Portsmouth (Sir J. Elphinstone), who complained that
if you reduce the masts and yards, you will prevent
the proper working of the ships. Here is a proof
that there need be no alarm on this subject. The
Ariadne has a larger area of sails, masts, and yards than the
Shannon, which is about to be reduced, yet the Ariadne
has 100 men less. But there has been no complaint that
the Ariadne cannot man the'spars and sails—at least, no
reason why there should be complaint. Complaints there
always are. Every naval officer wishes to obtain as many
men as possible for his ship. I always made a point of ap-
plying for more men; but it is for the Admiralty to judge
in such cases. I now turn to our iron-cased ships, and it
will be interesting that I should give the house some infor-
mation as to their progress. [Sir J. Pakington—" What
was the cost of the Warrior ?"] The cost of the Warrior,
including all except her armament, was £354,885. Her
armament besides is about £13,000. We have now in the
course of construction 15 iron-cased ships built and build-
ing, of which there will be, we hope, 11 afloat in the course
of the present year. (Hear, hear.) In the course of 1863
there will be 12 afloat—that is, one more—and in 1864
there will be 1.5, and in addition there will be a new ship,
provided the Committee agree to the construction of this
novel ship, to which I will presently allude. If tho Com-
mittee desire it, I can give the tonnage and horse-power
connected with these vessels. The first class of ships, in-
cluding the Agincourt, the Minotaur, and the Northum-
berland, were agreed to last summer; they are in process
of building, and they will be ready in 1864. They are
400 ft. long, and it is expected they will attain a speed of
14 knots an hour. They will be of 6,621 tons. These
ships are of a peculiar build, as they carry their plating
right round. The Warrior and other ships are
only partially plated up to a certain distance from
and se. bl ao
:Ist
;11,5 bow and stern, but these vessels of the
IZrt class are to be plated right round. The
The next class e,
the Black 1,,i
plated, are of 6,100
each of
comprises the Warrior (which has been at sea,
which I shall have a few words to say presently),
next class includes %ell
are of 3,668 tons, and
next class is that of the
Caledonia, the Royal
flooand the Achilles. They are partially
tons, and have a speed of 14 knets.
4,otpoic comprises the Hector and the Va-
liant,with a speed of 12 knots. The
have
and the Defence, which
;Brian, speed of 11•45 knots. The
Alfred,
aendeonsort, the Ocean, the
Royali Oak, which
were begun as line-of-battle shipsthwe h.
converted to iron-plated frigates, and Which are
tonobo w being
platedwooden
right round. Their tonnage is 4,015, They are