The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 6, 1853,

cries of order, during which the hon. gentleman resumed
his seat amid great laughter.)
Mr. SEATING resumed.—The words of the committee's
report were these :
" There can be little doubt that these results have attended
the appointments adverted to by witnesses well qualified to
give an impartial opinion on this subject. Officers of high
character in the navy, distinguished alike for professional
abilities and unblemished honour, observed the course of pro-
motion in the dockyards during the last summer with appre-
hension, with feelings of humiliation, with dismay, and even
with disgust."
- -

-- -
That statement was amply borne out by the letters of Com-
modore Seymour, Admiral Parker, and Captain Richards,
which had been put in evidence. It had been proved also
that the hon. gentleman the Secretary to the Admiralty
stood at the ticket-office at Devonport, with the Govern-
ment candidates for that borough, as the workmen came
out of the yard ' • that he entertained the political friends
of the candidates there, the expenses of his trip and of the
dinner being charged to the contingencies fund. (Hear.)
It could not be doubted that such proceedings tended to
impair the efficiency of the service, and to bring discredit
upon the Government. However they might be regarded
by hon. gentlemen opposite, these matters were viewed
very seriously throughout the country at large, and he be-
lieved they were calculated not alone to damage this or
that party, but to bring the entire Government of this
country into discredit. (Cheers.) Under these circum-
stances, he called upon the house to confirm the resolution
of which he had given notice. (Cheers and counter cheers.)
On the question being put by the SPEAKER,
Sir J. PAKINGTON rose to move the adjournment of
this debate, and he did so because the extraordinary course
which the hon. and learned gentleman had thought it
fitting and becoming to take—(ceers and counter-cheers)
—had precluded the possibility of any fair discussion of
the motion, or any fair reply to the charges which he had
advanced. He could not congratulate the hon. and learned
gentleman on the course he had taken. Perhaps the hon.
and learned gentleman might be learned in the law, but it
was clear that he had a very limited sense of justice—(loud
cheers), and not even his short experience in that house
could for a moment excuse the most unjust course which
he had adopted- (oh ! and cheers), as to the gross impro-
priety of which he (Sir J. Pakington) believed that almost,
and he had hoped he might say quite, every man in that
house must have concurred. The hon. and learned gen-
tleman had, at one time when he was interrupted, spoken
of the importance of the subject. Very true, it was
important. But the more important the subject, the
more vital was 'that admission to the decorum of the
course which he had taken. (Hear.) The hon. and learned
gentleman had had short experience in this house, but
he had had long experience in courts of justice, and there
he must have learned, and he ought to know, that the
more important the subject the more imperative was
the necessity that that subject should be adequately, fairly,
and justly discussed. (Cheers.) Yet the hon. and learned
gentleman made a speech, two hours in length, criminat-
ing hon. members—(cheers)- and bringing heavy charges
against an Administration, knowing at that very moment
that it was physically impossible that any answer could be
made to the accusations he was bringing forward. (Cheers.)
He (Sir J. Pakingtou) for one, he believed among many
others, had been prepared to discuss the question with the
hon. and learned gentleman. He came forward to beg the
Government for a day, and did not shrink from the dis-
cussion of this question. He was prepared to say, and he
said now, that had he been permitted to do so, he came
down fully prepared to discuss it, and to contend that
the administration of the Board of Admiralty under Lord
Derby's Government was entitled to the gratitude, and
not to the—(the remainder of the sentence was inaudi-
ble amidst the cries of "Oh, oh 1" and counter cheers.)
and would have contended for, if a course had not
This was what he had been prepared to contend for,
been taken which he held to be a greater departure
b
if
nr o
tmh
ijusticee. than
Ha
dany hhee
er
ne mm
favoured
e b e r edwt
iot haveh an 0
ppe
oe
rnt
ut an
ikteyn,
it would have been his duty to have taken grave exception
was quite
lordt of
eawaregrtheatat
ttohatthesorempomirtueoef twhaescoprmesmiditetdeea. Hverhey
a noble
,
committee consisted of gentlemen whose honour and char-
acterhas the last man to question ; but he did think
ability and long experience in this house, and that that
p oorf t
whichwhich
waswas
open to very grave intoth e tone nr report
thattheatwcommitteeexhcaedptbiaeuen
alenda
most
which we would have endeavoured to show, had he
bitter and most severe-la tone of bitterness and se-
verityhad the opportunity he desired, was not borne out by the
evidence. (Cheers.) He believed he could have shown that
while the committee gave no opinions, they had indulged
in sarcasms and insinuations far more severe, and far more
difficult to grapple with, than the expression of any direct
opinions ; and he was sorry to say that, in his judgment,
that report, however unconsciously on the part of the
committee, was open to the grave exception of being char-
acterised rather by party prejudice and party bias than
by that judicial impartiality which ought to have been
its first and its chief characteristic. (Loud cheers.) He
should not endeavour to follow the hon. and learned gentle-
man through his " beer" and " honey"—(laughter)--be-
cause it was impossible so to follow him ; but he should
have commented, if he had had time, on the manner in
which that report referred to the hon. member for
Northampton (Mr. Stafford), and he thought he could
have shown to the satisfaction of this house, and, what
was of more importance, to the satisfaction of the
public, that the hon. member for Northampton was
most partially dealt with in that report. With regard to
the Duke of Northumberland, the First Lord of the
Admiralty, he was free to say that never was there
a human being more anxious fer the honour of the
noble service to which he belonged, and for the good
of the country, than was the noble duke in the
course of his adminstration. (Cheers.) They were told
of the manner in which these dockyard appointments were
carried out, and it was said that the Duke of Northumber-
land abandoned the whole of his civil patronage to the
secretary. Now, it was no such thing. It ought to be
known that all these minor appointments had been, during
the administration of previous First Lords, always in the
hands of the secretary, and had never been dispensed by
the First Lord. He should have been able to show that,
even with regard to these minor appointments, the Duke
of Northumberland had been influenced by the most laud-
able anxiety that they should be carried out in the man-
ner most conducive to the benefit of the service and of the
country at large. (Cheers.) One expression of this re-
port, in which the Duke of Northumberland was referred
to, he considered most harsh and most unjust. The com-
mittee said :

" One officer, of high standing in the navy, and supreme at
the Admiralty, had power to check these proceedings ; an
appeal was more than once made to him ; he intimated his
disapproval, but he declined to interfere. His rank and sta-
tion in the country, his position in the Government, his con-
nexion with the gallant service of the navy, were deemed to
be securities for the administration of a department confided
to the Duke of Northumberland."

He would ask the right hon. gentleman now presiding over
the Admiralty, whether, in his opinion, the administration
of that great department really turned upon the appoint-
ment of joiners and caulkers, and oakum boys? Were there
no graver matters ? How did the Duke of Northumber-
land administer that patronage which was really his ? What
were his instructions to Admiral Fanshawe ? Did that
show party feeling ? Did that show political bias? Then
as to the construction of the committee appointed by him
for the manning of the navy. Did those appointments
take place from party motives ? The chairman, Admiral
Parker, was one of the most distinguished officers in the
navy, and had been at the Board of Admiralty under the
Whig Government. Three of the members were entirely
opposed in politics to the Duke of Northumberland, one of
them was of his own politics, and the fifth of no politics at
all. His appointments to the command of vessels had
been distinguished by the like impartiality ; and for the
two measures standing on the notice paper for this evening
in the name of the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham),
with regard to the manning of the navy, the country
would be indebted to the steps taken by the noble duke
when First Lord of the Admiralty. Never were greater
services rendered to the navy then when the board was
presided over by the Duke of Northumberland. (Hear,
hear.) The right hon. baronet opposite, much to his credit,
was now about to carry out the report of the committee
which the duke had appointed and instructed. Had time
allowed ho would have adverted to the state of our fisheries
on the coast of North America, in which the Government
and the Crown had derived effectual assistance from the
efficient administration of the duke ; but his object was to
show the impossibility of analysing the evidence, which the
hon. and learned gentleman had attempted to do, at such
a period of the morning. As far as he was concerned, he
could only protest against the injustice of the course now
taken, and repeat his opinion that if time were given it
could be shown to the satisfaction of the house and of the
country that the department over which the Duke of Nor-
thumberland had presided was entitled to their gratitude
rather than their censure. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI said, that as far as he understood, there
was every prospect of the debate being renewed, and he
thought nothing could be more unjust or unfair than to
allow that motion to be made without any decision on it,
and he trusted his right hon. friend would not persevere in
his motion for the adjournment, but would ask the house
for an immediate vote on the question. (Cheers from the
Opposition.) They appealed under great disadvantages,
the accusations having been heard without a reply,
but that was a course they had a right to expect.
He had only one observation to make with regard to the
Duke of Northumberland. The duke had been inferentially
charged with a number of very paltry accusations on that
and on another occasion. All he could say was, that he
believed there never was an instance in which more energy,
more ability, and more devotion was brought to bear on
the administration of a great office than in the case of the
Duke of Northumberland. (Opposition cheers.) Let him
remind the house that that nobleman was only 10 months
in office, that he was hardly absent from a single board,
and that in the space of these 10 months he protected their
colonies, defended their coasts, and manned their navy—
(hear, hear) ;—and let him remind them, also, that those
great operations had been conceived and mainly conducted
by the duke himself, and that with his own hand he
wrote the instructions to the committee for manning the
navy which had been laid on their table, and read with
approbation by every member of that house. A man
actuated by such a high sense of duty, and capable of per-
forming such deeds, could not be crushed by any factious
oppos •
ition (Loud Opposition cheering.) He trusted his
right hon. friend would withdraw his amendment, and
would ask the house to vote at once their decision on this
great question. (Cheers, and cries for a division.)
Lord SEYMOUR (amid some expressions of impatience)
observed that the right hon. baronet had begun by telling
the house of his great love for justice, but had proceeded
to attack the report of the committee, which had been
agreed to unanimously by the members who were on both
sides of the house, though he had not brought forward the
exact points on which he wished to condemn it. If they
were not to adjourn the debate, how was the right hon.
baronet to prove his case, and show the report was un-
just and unfair. He objected to the words of the report
with respect to the Duke of Northumberland and the
civil patronage of the navy ; but, was it wrong to
quote the words of a witness when giving their
opinion as to his evidence ? Was that the way the
right hon. baronet proved the report was unjust? He
watched to see if the right hon. baronet referred to the
evidence to show that the report was contradictory to it, but
not one instance had he been able to bring forward. When
he (Lord Seymour) brought the report to the committee,
he entreated them to look to this point - -that in every word
of it they were borne out by the evidence. Whether they
agreed or not as to quoting the words of the evidence, the
first thing he told them they had to look to was to see
there was not a word used which the evidence did not prove
—and in that he had the consent of all the commitee, and
it was carried out in their report, which was, he thought,
fair—(oh, oh, from the Opposition)—and which he was
prepared to prove, not overstated. (Renewed groaning.)
The debate ought to be adjourned, in order to enable the
house to go fairly into the question, and he would there-
fore vote for the motion.

The question was then put. Some hon. members cried
"Aye," and others "No." A short pause ensued, and
finally the gallery was cleared in pursuance of shouts of