The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-12 00:00:00

THE LATE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY.

• EXAMINATION- OF MR. DISRAELI.
The Committee to inquire into Dockyard Appointments
and• Promotions met at 11 o'clock yesterday morning.
Mr. Disraeli, M.P., was the first witness called.
Lord Seymour (the chairman) informed Mr. Disraeli that
the committee had been informed by Sir Baldwin Walker
that, in a particular conversation, Mr. Stafford.had used
these words :—" It is of no use to blink the question. I
am so Tressed by Lord Derby and the Chancellor of the
Exchequer that I cannot help myself." He (the chairman)
wisl ad tO ask 51r. Disraeli whather he did express to Mr.
Ste tford any opinion regarding the management of pro-
m, lions in the dockyards ?
Mr. Disraeli—l never had any conversation with Mr.
Stafford, or any person who held office under the late Ad-
ministration, as to such matters.
Lord Seymour—ls the committee to understand that
you did not give any opinion as to the patronage of the
dockyards?
Mr. Disraeli—Mr. Stafford never consulted me upon any
such subject, nor did ally one holding office under the late
Administration. It was a subject not falling under my
department, and he did not speak to me on the subject.
The Chairman referred to the evidence of the Duke of
Northumberland, who stated that Mr.. Stafford complained
that, being responsible for all the patronage, he had not its
distribution, and was, consequently, without the means of
doing his duty, and said unless he was invested with that
power he could not retain his office. Do you (addressing
Mr. Disraeli) remember Mr. Stafford making any com-
plaint to you, as a member of the Government, under these
circumstances? •
_ . .

Mr. Disraeli—lf the committee wish it, I will state what
took place within my own knowledge of the facts and
parties, which will lead to the real cause of misunder-
standing. I did not come prepared to give such evidence,
but if the committee desire it I will state the facts. When

the late Government was formed, the Duke of Northum-
berland, from a high sense of public duty and a great love
for the profession of which he was a member, was most
anxious that a Board of Admiralty •should be formed as
free as possible from what are usually called political in-
fluences, and the board was formed, according to the
wishes of his grace, of distinguished naval officers, whose
sole object was the beat administration of that great branch
'of the public service. But the consequence, I have no
hesitation in saying, was that there existed a want of that
understanding between the board and the House of Com-
mons which had hitherto prevailed, and which prevails at I
present. The present Board of Admiralty is represented
in Parliament not merely by the Secretary, but by the
First Lord, and by a naval lord, so that the present board
has opportunities of effecting a perfect understanding
with the House of Commons. But when the board was
formed under Lord. Derby's Administration there was
only one, member of it who was a member of the
House of Commons, and that member, although a highly
distinguished naval officer, upon taking his seat at
the board, found himself in the presence of his su-
periors in professional rank, and of course was greatly in-
fluenced by them. Upon Mr. Stafford, therefore, devolved
the expression of the feelings of the House of Commons, as
he was the only civilian connected with the board, and upon
that duty he entered not only without experience, but
under great difficulties. I may perhaps add that the con-
sequence of this was, that from the first there was not that
sympathy between the board and the House of Commons
which is so necessary in our Parliamentary government. I
have no hesitation, from my position as leader of the House
of Commons at the time, in giving this as my opinion.
Mr. Stafford was placed in a difficulty by having mainly
to consider the House of Commons, without having any
one to support him at the Board of Admiralty, the mem-
bers of which looked to what it considered the good of the
service, not only in matters of patronage, but in other
questions ; and I felt it my duty to support the Secretary
of the Admiralty, as the presont leader of the House of
Commons would do in questions of public expenditure,
which the secretary, acting upon the views of the House
of Cominons, would feel it his duty to bring under the
notice of the Board of Admiralty ; but that board, consti-
tuted as I have said, listened to those views with some de-
gree of jealousy. In fact thefe was not that harmony
which should exist between the House of Commons and
every branch of the service, and which can only exist when
a considerable number of the members of that branch are
members of the House of Commons. I mean to say that
the Board of Admiralty only looked to the benefit of the
service, and only considered the efficiency of the service.
They did not understand the spirit of our Parliamentary
government—that in conducting their: affairs they must
consider the temper of the House of Commons, which, in
the present board, is represented by several members.
Take, for instance, the Secretary of the Admiralty repre-
senting to me, as his duty was, that the expenditure was
exceeding the, estimates, it was my duty, as the guardian
of the public purse, to tend to that representation, and
I ordered a weekly account to be sent to the Treasury.
These things happened early in our Administration, and
this order was looked upon by the board as rather an un-
warrantable li interftrence!,Nt the functions of the Ad-
miralty. .
The Chairman—You;isChancellor of the •Exchequer,
and responsible for the public expenditure, were naturally
anxious to keep a control over the expenditure of the Ad-
miralty; that I can understand.
Mr. Disraeli—l do not lay much stress %ion that in-
stance, save as an illustration. Such a direction, under
ordinary circumstances, would not be received with any
jealousy by the members of the board, if they were also
members of the House of Commons. Mr. Stafford was
placed in circumstances of great difficulty, and he com-
municated them to me. I advised him to conciliate as
much as possible, but to do his duty, and not to bring for-
ward any proposition which the board was not prepared to
support.
Sir H. Davie—Did Mr. Stafford state that his difficul-
ties arose from professional matters only, or from pressure
put upon him in the disposal of patronage ?
Mr. Disraeli—He would not speak to me upon such
small matters, but generally upon the extreme difficulty he
found in carrying on his office, and he naturally came to
me for counsel and support. Our conversation took place
in the House of Commons, behind the Speaker's chair,
after questions had been answered, and not at formal in-
terviews. My advice to him was to conciliate as much as
possible, and I pointed but the novelty of the position of
several of these gentlemen ; and I must say I always found
Mr. Stafford extremely desirous of acting upon the general
advice I gave.
Sir EI. Davie again invited the attention of Mr. Disraeli
to the expressions imputed by Sir B. Walker to Mr. Staf-
ford.

The Right Hon. Gentleman replied—l thought I had an-
swered that question. I never pressed Mr. Stafford nor
any member of the late Administration on . the subject of
patronage, or to induce its exercise with a view to the
coming elections. Such a matter would not occur to me
nor any one in my position. Mr. Stafford expressed to
me from the first the great difficulties he had to contend
against, arising from this spirit of jealousy and suspicion,
created as I have bofore stated.

The Chairman—Did Mr. Stafford express to yOn that
his difficulties were increased by the fact of the preceding
Government having filled up all the appointments, and
given all promotions to their own friends ?
Mr. Disraeli—No. He never went into details of this
kind; but I think it right to.state that ho did mention to
me that he was placed in a difficulty with regard to the
Surveyor-General, and I remember I gave him my ad-
vice. I may say, did not go into details. I looked upon
the Surveyor-General as a permanent civil servant of the
Crown, and my advice was to treat these permanent civil
servants of the Crown not only in a conciliatory manner,
but so as to invite cordiality and confidence ; and upon
that point I spoke from my own experience. When I
went to the Treasury the principal civil servants of the
Crown there were men of, I may say, extreme liberal opin-
ions, having been appointed by the preceding GovernMent.
I treated them with implicit confidence, and they served
me with seal and fidelity, and even devotion, and no I
recommended Mr. Stafford to treat the Surveyor-General.
I did not go into the causes of the misunderstanding with
that officer, but Mr. Stafford told me he would act upon
my advice, and I think he did so act. That was the only
personal instance brought before me ; but some time after,
Mr. Stafford spoke to me in the House of Commons about
the letter of Sir B. Walker to the Duke of Northumber-
land. Ido not know whether the letter he showed m'e
was the original letter or a copy to prove to me that he
had not succeeded in establishing that good understanding
Which I had recommended. When I read that letter I was
very much annoyed, and made this observation, " If this
is the mode in which your overtures are to be met, I think
he had better resign." .Mr. Stafford replied, "That is
quite out of the question, for the Duke of Northumber-
land considers this as a strictly confidential communica-
tion, and I will do what I can to make things pleasant."
I said—" If this is the case, and Sir B. Walker com-
plains of your interference, you had bettor see him,
and have some conversation with him, and make
him understand your wish to go on cordially with him.
To this Mr. Stafford agreed, and from that time, in March,
I never heard of the matter again until late in the autumn,
when Mr. Stafford called upon me in Downing-street to go
through the naval estimates. then asked him how things
were going on in his office, and ho said nothing could be
better—that he had a perfect understanding with Sir B.
Walker, and that it was impossible for anybody to work
better together.
The Chairman asked Mr. Disraeli if he was to under-
stand that from his official experience ho had found that
the heads of departments, although principally appointed
by preceding Governments of different views, had acted
fairly towards him ?
Mr. Disraeli—l can only speak from my own knowledge
of the Treasury ; but I can say that the permanent civil
officers there do their duty cordially and completely, and
would do so if a change.of Government were to take place
to-morrow. That is my decided opinion of that depart-
ment ; but, of course, I cannot speak of my own knowledge
of other offices.

In answer to the Chairman—As far as my personal ex-
perience extends, I can say that I believe the administra-
tion of affairs was carried on in perfect cordiality and good
faith by every office which came under my notice, with
the exception of the Admiralty, and that exception did
not arise from the absence of good faith in individuals,
but, as I have before stated, from the want of a perfect
understanding between the Parliamentary administration
of the Admiralty and the general administration. Every
other branch of the public service was sufficiently repre-
sented in the House of Commons except the Admiralty,
which consequently regarded all questionings and inter-
ference of the house with jealousy.
The Chairman—Was there any other ground of dis-
satisfaction, except upon the question of expenditure ?
Mr. Disraeli.—There was no other cause of misunder-
standing between the Admiralty and the Parliament, but
I can understand that various members of Parliament,
looking to the particular patronage which has been alluded
to, may have pressed, and did press, upon Mr. Stafford for
its disposal ; and if he found -himself unable to comply
with their wishes, that might possibly be a cause of mis-
understanding, as the persons who support the Govern-
ment naturally look to a fair distribution of its patronage.
That may have led to a misunderstanding. I only wish it
to be understood that, so far as I am concerned, it was not
brought under my cognisance.
The Chairman—We have heard from the Duke of Nor-
thumberland that he gave up all his patronage to Mr. Staf-
ford, thus leaving to the Secretary all the patronage
usually enjoyed by the First Lord. Would not that rather
assist the Secretary in dealing with the House of Com-
mons ?
Mr. Disraeli—Probably it might ; but this was a matter
never brought under my notice. I have never considered
the question of promotions in the navy or dockyards at all.
The right lion. gentleman then retired.
Captain Duncombo, one of the members of the late
Board of Admiralty, applied to tho committee that a cer-
tain portion of the evidence of Captain Dundas, given on
Tuesday, relating to a complaint from the board respecting
a cask of raisins, should either be struck out, or the sub-
ject bo gono into fully, as it did not in any way relate to
the late Secretary of the Admiralty.
The committee decided upon striking out the portion of
the evidence alluded to by Captain Duncombe.
Mr. Stafford was then recalled—He said his first diffi-
. culties arose from being the only civilian at the board,

which had a stronger regard for the efficiency of the ser-
vice than for the estimates voted by Parliament, and he
had felt it his duty to protest against measures which, he
feared, would cause an expenditure beyond the-elitifilatis.
He considered it his dutyto control the expenditure with the
assistance of the Surveyor and Accountant-Generals, but
never felt it a duty to consult the Surveyor particularly
upon the question of savings to be effected by not filling
up•vacancies: In cancelling the circular of 1849 he did
not think he was destroying the efficiency of that control
on the part of the surveyor. He did not,consider that by
taking the correspondence relating to vacancies to himself
he prevented the surveyor from offering any suggestion as to
savings by not filling up vacancies, as that officer, being in
constant communication with all the dockyards, Inuit have
been fully aware of every vacancy that occurred.
Upon the question of the agreement of the board with
the House of Commons,
Mr. Stafford said—The committee must bo aware of the
increasing habit of the house to inquire into the minute
details of every branch of the service ; and consequently,
being almost the only member of the Admiralty who sat in
Parliament, it was necessary for him to bo acquainted with
all the correspondence that took place relating thereto.
The chief difficulty, as ho had before stated, arose from
Parliamentary friends complaining that all dockyard pa-
tronage was given to hostile parties. Many names were
Mentioned of people passed over from political causes. He
made no inquiry into them, because ho thought the best
way to meet the difficulty was by cancelling the circular of
1819, which he did not then think of suciniportance
as
it was said to be now. Mr. Parker surrendered, in 1849,
the little patronage which was left hini by Sir H. Want.
The Chairman reminded, Mr. Stafford that he had, in a
speech upon the motion for this inquiry, led the House of
Commons to believe that the circular of 1849 had been
something like a delusion during the period when Sir
Francis Baring was First Lord and Mr. Parker Secretary
to the Admiralty, and asked him to explain.
Mr. Stafford replied that Mr. Parker surrendered his
patronage to Somerset-house, and that- portion he (Mr.
Stafford) sought to get back •by the cancelling of the cir-
cular of 1849. It had been represented to hint that the pa-
tronage was bestowed on persons opposed to the Govern-
ment, and that although Sir B. Walker might know of it,
this was done by other people in his name. He could not
mention any names to prove this statement. In cancelling
the circular of 1849 he had not intended to diminish the
power of the superintendent of the dockyards in recom-
mending persons to fill vacancies.
Several cases of direct appointments from the Admiralty
without the intervention of the Surveyor, were explained
byMr. Stafford, who stated that all those cases were ap-
pointments to the lowest classes, which he considered
were . to l2e looked upon as first entries, whether the
men had been previously in the dockyards or not, and
in most cases, he was not aware, when making the ap-
pointments, that the people were already employed in the
service.
Sir B. Hall referred to the evidence of the Duke of
Northumberland, who had said Mr. Stafford had informed
him that the circular of 1849 had been issued by the
sole authority of Mr. Parker, and not by a board
minute ; and that as he possessed the same power as
that gentleman, he should cancel it. The hon. member
asked Mr. Stafford if he had informed his Grace that the
circular was approved by Mr. Parker and minuted by the
First Lord.
Mr. Stafford said—Ho had not. On the 2d of April •he
wrote to the Surveyor, saying that his friends were dissatis-
fied with the distribution of the patronage, and ho could
only remove that dissatisfaction by cancelling the circular
of 1849. It was not in consequence of consultations with,
political friends that he cancelled that circular, but they
had complained that all the influence was used against tho
Government, and he did all he could properly do toremody
that complaint by cancelling the circular, which had been
done without any order of the board, as it had been issued
without such authority.
Sir B. Hall asked if Mr. Stafford declined to name
the friends whom he consulted before cancelling -the cir-
cular ? It was necessary to know that in order to decide
upon the course of the inquiry, as, if the names of those
friends were given, it might necessitate an extension of this
inquiry.
Mr. Stafford considered the communications with those

persons had been quite confidential, and he must, with all
respect to the committee, decline to mention names.
In reply to further questions from Sir B. Hall,
Mr. Stafford stated that he received no instructions
from the Board of Admiralty to visit Davenport. He
arrived in that port on the 22d or 23d of Juno, and met
Sir J. Maxwell and General Berkeley the same afternoon
at Moreshead's Hotel.
Sir B. Hall referred to the evidence of Mr. Triscott,
who spoke of being present at a dinner given by Mr.
Stafford, at which were present also Sir John Maxwell,
one of the candidates, Messrs. Beer and Smith, his agents,
Dr. Butter, chairman of Mr. Mare's committee, Dr. Blan-
cross, Admiral Morris and several others, who took active
parts in the pending election.
Mr. Stafford admitted that it was not consistent with
his duty as Secretary to the Admiralty to invite those per-
sons to dinner at that period, but he must observe that
there were two dinners included in the charge of 421. 15s.
The first party included 17 persons, who were all con-
nected with the service. The second party comprised 19
persons, of whom the majority were also officers connected
with the service ; and, although ho was sorry that he had
invited the particular gentlemen alluded to on the second
occasion, he must say that neither party was got up with
any view to election matters. It was true that he was
at Plymouth in April a few days after Mr. Mare
became a candidate for that borough, but he had not
the slightest notion of that gentleman's candidature at.
that time. The reason of his going upon that occasion
was that, from the commencement of his taking office,
he had felt a strong desire to have a trip in one of her
Majesty's vessels, and Admiral Parker placed the Retri-
bution at his disposal during the Easter vacation. Upon
that occasion he did not believe he ever was in Mr.
Mare's committee-room. He admitted that Commodore
Seymour was correct in stating that he (Mr. Stafford)
went round the dockyard with the two Conservative can.
didates. He repeated now what he 'had told the House
of Commons, that it would have been better if he had not
done so ; but he declared that his reason for stopping at
the gate to seo all the men pass was to view the extraor-
dinary manner in which a vast number of men deposited
their tickets in a short space of time. It was impossible
to expect that his appearance with the two Conservative
candidates could have had any effect upon the men, who
passed through so rapidly that very few could have seen
him at all. Ho had gone through Deptford-yard with
Mr. Rolt, but simply upon that gentleman's request that
ho would accompany him through the yard, and not with
any view to influence the votes of the men. Had such
been his object, he would have adopted the same course at
Chatham. Captain Dundas had stated that he (Mr. Staf-
ford) had written to him asking him to use his influence
in the yard in favour of Mr. Rolt, but, to the best of his
recollection, he had never written to Captain Dundas in
his life, and regretted exceedingly that that officer had
destroyed the letter, which would have decided the ques-
tion whether it was an election hoax or a genuine one. If
Captain Dundas had believed it was a hoax, he ought to
have sent it to him (Mr. Stafford) ; but, if he believed it
came from the Secretary to the Admiralty, with a view to
induce the superintendent of a dockyard to canvass for a
particular candidate, then ho should have sent it to the
First Lord of the Admiralty.
In answer to Lord Hotham—There was no fixed rule at
the Admiralty respecting the distribution of patronage.
He believed that not many years ago the clerks of the Ad-
miralty were considered as the clerks of the Secretary.
At present the board usually arranged its own distribution
of patronage.
Captain Dundas was then recalled, and said ho received
a note from a gentleman with the compliments of Mr.
Stafford. He could not state the precise terms of the note,
but it conveyed the general impression that it was desired
that he (Captain Dundas) should give what assistance he
could to Mr. Rolt. He knew the handwriting of that note
to be Mr. Stafford's. If he had the slightest doubt upon
that point he should have been most happy to acquit Mr.
Stafford of writing that note, but ho had not the slightest
hesitation or doubt upon the matter.
Mr. Stafford re-asserted that ho had not the remotest
recollection of having written, on any occasion, to Captain
Dundas, especially in a manner so completely out of his
ordinary line of conduct. He, of course, assumed that
Captain Dundas mist have received such a note, but was
inclined to believe it to have been an election hoax, and
deeply regretted that it should have been destroyed.
Sir Baldwin Walker, being recalled, repeated his former
evidence that Mr. Grant had stated to him that he had
been sent by Mr. Stafford to inquire what vacancies there
.were, to which he replied that having held the office of
Surveyor for four years without allowing political influ-
ences to interfere with his duty, ho was not going to begin
then for Mr. Stafford or anybody else. The gallant cap-
tain then proceeded to reiterate several points in his
former evidence which have already been published.
The sailing orders of the Black Eagle were produced,
with an original order, dated June 19, and addressed to
Commodore Eden, directing that vessel to be sent to Ports-
mouth, which order was marked with the initials "H. P."
(Admiral Sir Hyde Parker.)
The Chairman then asked Mr. Stafford whether he had
any further evidence to give, or any witnesses to suggest?
Mr. Stafford remarked, that the committee had not gone
into the proceedings of any Board of Admiralty but the
last.

The Chairman reminded Mr. Stafford that he had asked
him on a former occasion whether he had any witnesses
who could elucidate the statement he had made in the
House of Commons respecting the evasions of the circular
of 1849, practised in the time of Sir F. Baring's administra-
tion. The hon. gentleman had also read some letters in
support of that statement.
Mr. Stafford replied, that evidence on such a subject
was extremely difficult to obtain.
The Chairman—But you have had the best opportunities
of obtaining it. I have always found that all persons
who consider themselves injured by an outgoing Govern-
ment take an immediate opportunity of bringing their
grievances under the notice of a new Government,
Mr. Stafford said, the people whe wrote to him had
given all the information they could, and he remedied their
complaints as far as he could, but they feared personal
consequences if they wore called upon to give evidence.
The Chairman—Then we are to understand that your
statement that there was jobbing and lax practices under
Sir Francis Baring's administration rests upon anonymous
communications only.
Mr. Stafford—l believe I could produce some evidence
upon that subject, but I expected the committee would
have gone into it.
Sir B. Hall called Mr. Stafford's attention to the fact,
that he had originally moved for an inquiry into the exer-
cise of patronage in the dockyards connected with boroughs
since the 19th of April, 1852 (the date of the cancelling of
the circular of 1819), but had struck out the words " since
the 19th of April, 1852," at the suggestion of Sir F.
Thesiger, on account of the statement he (Mr. Stafford)
had made in his address to the House on that occasion.
Mr. Stafford asked the committee to allow him until to-
morrow (this day) to consult the other members of the late
Board of Admiralty:. _

Captain Deneonibe_then tendered his evidence in eapla•

nationd he of
backedhisCots
ell's reasonsoe
warrantgTiing Caost se ll'sappointment.master-smithof
Hsai
Ports-
mouth,
knowing all the circumstances of the case, and he
concurred with Mr. Stafford in thinking that the appoint-
ment of Wells by Admiral Parker was irregular. He be-
lieved ho had seen upon Admiral Parker's table his minute
approving of Wells's nomination, but took no notice of it,
as he considered that Admiral Parker had no more power
to appoint a master smith at Portsmouth than he (Captain
Duncombe) had to send the fleet to sea. It was, moreover,
an introduction from the private trade—a practice which
the late Board of Admiralty had set their faces against.
He did not know that Sir F. Smith had recommended
Cotsell. All that Mr. Stafford said was that Cotsell was
senior master smith in the service, and was anxious to, go
to Portsmouth. He quite agreed with the Secretary that
it was merely a transfer and ought to be allowed. Could
not perceive the slightest injury to the service in appoint-
ing a man to lead in a yard in which he had previously
filled an inferior situation, any more than there would be
in promoting an A.B. to be boatswain in the shi
Admiral Berkeley was then called, and stated that .he
was present with Sir B. Walker when the latter officer read

--•
over to Admiral Parker his statement of Mr. Stafford's
words, " That it was of no use blinking the question ; he
was so_pirsed by Lprd Derby and the Chancellor of the
-ExChequerjhat he could not help himself." When those
words were read he (Admiral Berkeley) said, " Surely, no
man could be guilty of such an indiscretion." Upon which
Admiral Parker turned round and said, "He did, though;
I heard him."

In answer to the noble Chairman, Admiral Berkeley
said, he had been on six Boards of Admiralty, and believed
the practice to be, that the appointment of men to enter
the dockyards for the first time was the Secretary's pa-
tronage, but that when once a man had entered the yard
the Secretary had nothing further to do with him as to pa-
tronage. That was the practice under Lord Auckland and
Sir F. Baring.
The committee then adjourned until to-day.