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

direct legislative enactment. He trusted therefore that the
house would pause before it gave its assent to the introduc-
tion of the proposed measure.
Lord PALMERSTON said he did not mean to offer the
slightest opposition to the introduction of the measure
which the hon. member for Oldham proposed to lay before
the house ; but at the same time he should reserve to him-
self the privilege of taking that course which ho might
deem most advisable upon the second reading of the bill.
He (Lord Palmerston) had intended to bring in a measure
for the purpose of limiting the hours of the employment of
children in our manufactures, and in that measure he had
proposed to insert a provision to the effect that children
should not be employed in our factories at an earlier hour
than, six in the morning or at a later hour than six in the
evening. At the present moment children might be engaged
at half-past five in morning and kept at work until half-past
six or even seven in the evening. Those children had to
walk in many instances three or four miles from their
homes to the places at which they were employed, and had
to accomplish that journey alone in dark and inclement
winter weather. It was not, therefore, a matter of sur-
prise that in the case of those children the mortality which
was said to prevail should be considerable in its extent.
It would be no doubt a matter of considerable delicacy to
interfere by legislative enactment with the employment of
those persons who, being of age were supposed to be able
to determine for themselves, and who ought to be consi-
dered as free agents, and therefore as at liberty to work as
long as they pleased. His own opinion was, that the mill-
owners were not pursuing their real interests in dealing
with those whom they employed as if they were mere ma-
chines, and as if the longer they could work them the
greater would be their own profits. He believed those
employers would act much more wisely if they were to
proceed upon the principle that their workmen were moral
and intelligent agents, and were to consider that, unless
those workmen obtained that moderate degree of leisure
essential to their well-being, they would be unable to get
through the same amount of work -which, under a better
system, they would have no difficulty in executing. It
might be said that to limit the number of hours for labour
in the case of children would indirectly tend to limit those
hours in the case of persons who were advanced in age.
Such might be the result of the proceeding ; but he could
by no means look upon the probability of such a result
taking place as a good reason for refusing to deal with the
question in the manner which he had indicated. He had
no objection to offer to the introduction of the bill of the
hon. gentleman ; but he had to state that it was his inten-
tion to introduce a measure for the limited purpose he had
mentioned. (Hear, hear-)
Lard JOHN MANNERS thought that Lord Palmer-
ston's plan would not go far enough, and he energetically
condemned the Compromise Act, asserted the rights of the
operatives to their charter, the Ten Hours Bill, and de-
nounced the fraudulent conduct of the millowners, pursued
for the sake of sordid pecuniary gain. He demanded that
the penalties for breach of the act should be made far
larger and more effectual. He warmly supported the bill.
Sir G. GREY expressed gratification at the results of
the acts he had assisted in passing, and he remarked upon
the exaggerations in Lord J. Manners' speech, and charged
him with stating exceptional instances as the rule in manu-
facturing districts. He defended the Compromise Act,
which, he showed from Mr. Horner's report, had mainly
conduced to the present favourable condition of the opera-
tives, and he stated that nineteen-twentieths of the manu-
facturers faithfully conformed to that act. He regretted
that Lord Palmerston had not given a more decided nega-
tive to the principle of the proposed measure.
Mr. L BUTT said that practices were going on in many
mills directly in violation of the law. Young women were
concealed in hiding-places to evade the inspectors; and as
these practices were resorted to, the question necessarily
raised was, whether the law was to be enforced or not ?
The factory operatives were fully justified in coming for-
ward and saying that the question was not yet settled.
They had an undoubted right to say, " You have not set-
tled the question ; if it were a compromise we had no part
in it." Upon what was the legislation on this subject
founded ? It was founded upon evidence brought before
the house that 10 hours' labour was the utmost limit that
children could endure. The question, therefore, had never
been settled, and until a 10 hours' bill were passed, it
never would be settled.
Mr. W. J. FOX expressed his concurrence in the object
contemplated by his hon. colleague in introducing this
bill. The intense interest felt by his constituents for the
last 30 or 40 years in this question was paramount to all
interest felt by them in any political questions, knowing
that the object of the present measure was to restore to
them the half-hour which the bill of 1847 was intended to
give to them, and which, by a subsequent act, had been un-
generously taken away from them. The arrangement of
1847 was satisfactory to the working people ; but that act
broke down from a technical defect, and then advantage
was taken to get rid of the arrangement itself, and a very
unsatisfactory arrar.gement was substituted for it. Coin-
ciding with the object of his hon. colleague, he would re-
serve his opinion as to the means of v.ecompliching that ob-
ject until file bill was before the house. The proposition
made by the noble lord (Palmerston) for taking care of the
children was very valuable so far as it went, but the noble
lord should remember that protection was required not for
children only, but for women and young persons. It was
not after the ago at which persons were allowed to go into
the mills that mortality prevailed. It was anterior to that
time that the evil occurred. The evil was the effect of the
occupation upon the physical condition of the women, and
it was with them that the mortality required to be abated.
lie admitted it was a delicate question to interfere with
. .

the machinery and working of the factories ; but there 11
was another question—how else were they to enforce the
law ? Had they enforced it ? If not, would they enforce
it? Hitherto, notoriously that had not been done. If all
the power of Government could not make the employers
obey the law, then some measure must be had recourse to
to compel them to obey it.
Mr. PATTEN said, it would seem by the observations
of the noble lord that the practice was a systematic evasion
of the law on the part of the millowners.
Lord J. MANNERS diaolaimed having aaid anything of
the kind.
Mr. PATTEN was sure the noble lord did not intend to
say it, but his words implied it. Now, representing a
county in which there were large manufacturing interests,
he should not do his duty if he did not say that in Lanca-
shire the law was generally acted up to, not only in the
spirit, but in the letter. No doubt there were instancesin
which there were evasions. But he considered it would be
a very great misfortune to raise a discussion again on this
question, which could only have the effect of setting master

against man. If the mac lord (Palmerston) was-contem-
plating putting a restriction upon the moving power in the
mills, he hoped an .opportunity would bo given to the
country to consider what was intended by the Government
-to be done. He could imagine nothing more mischievous
than to disturb the motive power with which the manu-
facturing classes were connected.
Lord PALMERSTON said, that the only motive power
he contemplated to affect was the motive power of the chil-
dren. (Laughter.)
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, the answer which the noble
lord had given was quite satisfactory. This was not the
proper time for going into the question ; an opportunity
would be afforded on the second reading of the bill ; but
there was one principle in the bill of such importance that
be could not help calling attention to it. It had always
been said that the object of the law was to protect those
who could not protect themselves—children, women, and
young persons ; but it was always disclaimed that it was
ever intended to interfere with the right of a man to labour
to such an extent as he might think fit for his own interest.
But, if he understood the hon. gentleman, he proposed to
_put a stop to adult lahour. It was the very greatest sub-
ject which that house, representin the greatest manufac-
turing country in the world, could'entertain. He did not,
however, complain of the hon. gentleman for asking to be
allowed to bring in the bill. If legislation as it stood was
not sufficient, then it was the duty of the house to make
it effectual. But that was quite a distinct question from
what was now before the house, and he must regret that
the noble lord the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment, when he gave his consent to the introduction of the
bill, did not state his intention to resist a principle that
would hold out any false hopes to the population. He
considered that holding out such hopes would be fraught
with danger. He respected the manufacturing population
is much as any man could do; but he greatly mistook the
intelligence of that class if they were not aware that no
legislation ought to interfere with the right they possessed
to dispose of their labour for such a price and in such man-
ner as they might think best.
Mr. BOOKER said he was largely engaged in connection
with manufacturing industry, and should give his most un-
qualified assent to any measure such as was now submitted
to their consideration. _ .

Lord J. RUSSELL was induced to address the house in
Consequence of his right hon. friend the member for Mor-
peth (Sir G. Grey) and his right hon. friend the member for
Taunton (Mr. Labouchere) appearing to imagine that his
noble friend (Lord Palmerston) had held out false hopes of
legislation with respect to the restriction of the motive
power in the mills. His noble friend, in assenting to the
introduetion of the bill, carefully reserved to himself the
right to retain his opinion on the subject till the second
reading. The only observation he made in which he at all
alluded to the motive power was, that he was opposed to
any restriction on adult labour. That was a principle in
favour of which he (Lord J. Russell) had always voted.
He did not think it would be right, or that there was any
necessity, to restrict adult labour. It would be a sacrifice
of principle to make any proposition of the kind. What-
ever statement the hon. gentleman (Mr. Cobbett) might
make as to the many evasions of the present law, that was
perfectly consistent with the object of his bill, and he
(Lord J. Russell) thought it was but fair that the house
should give the hon. gentleman leave to bring in his bill,
and when it came to a second reading they could then con-
fidently and fairly discuss the question. The object of the
bill of his right hon. friend (Sir G. Grey), in 1850, was not
merely to correct a verbal error in the act of 1847, but it
was to put an end to a system of relays which had been in-
troduced, and which had worked most injuriously to those
for whose benefit the act of 1847 was passed.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said, if the laws of the country
were systematically violated, not by a majority, but by a
people, then, in justice to those who had
minority of the
sought legislative protection, and in justice to the fair
trader, who had consented to abide by the laws, he was
prepared, if there were no other effectual means, to assent
-to a restriction of the motive power in factories, at all
events, in those villa should be proved to have violated
and infringed the law.
Mr. E. BALL supported the motion, and read some cases
from the reports of the Factory Inspectors to prove the
evasions of the present law at Manchester.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
DOCKYARD COMMITTEE'S REPORT.
On Mr. KEATING being called on to proceed with his
motion on the subject,
Mr. DISRAELI said, he hoped the hon. gentleman
would allow him to make a suggestion. The hon. gentle-
man had given notice of a motion of a very important and
peculiar kind. It was, in fact, a motion for a vote of cen-
sure on the late Administration and especially on the Board
of Admiralty, who were all
" calculated to reflect discergeld:to have acted in a manner
the Government, and et it upon that. department of
impair the efficiency of the ser-
vice." He could hardly su
would wish, at that late henrPOV'tt that the hon gentleman
when it
(a quarter st
11), to bring on this question, inttf‘wVohllliedh behe hardlymioht
possible to answer any ex pane statelnne
make. The late Government were
~anxious to meet any charge that could be ready mad
and,
Wittrrei,ight against
any act of their Administration ;
i;,-,spect to the
dmiralty, that department which Nv
should be perfectly content to -appeal to the tiZteol thee
fleet at Spithead as the best answer that could be •
given.
I "Order !") He presumed ho was perfectly in
(Cries of
order in what he had said.
Mr. H. KEATING would be happy to hear any tor,
gestion or proposal which the right hon. gentleman might
desire to make to him, but it was scarcely in order to an-
t ticipate to the subject-matter of the motion, and to do that
• which he apprehended ho (Mr. Keating) was about to do
—make a sort of ex parte statement. (Hear, hear.) If
1 hev•ght hon. gentleman would confine himself strictly to
a wking any question, or to making any proposition, he should

be moat happy to listen to it ; but if not he hoped he
would allow him to proceed with his motion. (Hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI believed he, was strictly in order, in
rising to move that the house do now adjourn. (Oh, oh !
and No, no !)
Sir J. SHELLEY rose amid groans and hootings from
the Opposition. He rose to order. The hon. member for
Reading was in possession of the house, and he asked if it
was competent in that case for the right hon. gentleman to
move the adjournment? (Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER said, he had called upon the hon. mem-
ber for Reading, and he supposed when the right hon. gen-
tleman rose that it was his intention to put to him a ques-
tion on the subject of his motion.
Mr. DISRAELI would not repeat his motion for an ad-
journment; but he would ask the hon. member for Read-
ing whether he thought it fair to bring forward a motion
such as that on the paper at an hour when it would be
impossible for the house to listen to anything more than
the charge? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. KEATING should be very sorry to have the
appearance of doing anything unfair, especially with re-
ference to a motion of no ordinary importance. At the
same time, the right hon. gentleman must recollect that
he was a private member of the house, and could not com-
mand his own time as to bringing forward the motion.
He should be extremely sorry to press the motion under
such circumstances as would prevent an answer being
heard from the other aide of the house ; but, if he put off
Ile motion, he did not know when he would be able to
-ring it on again. (Hear, hear.) Unless a day was given
him by the Government he must proceed with his motion
now. (" Go on.")
Mr. DISRAELI suggested that the hon. gentleman
should appeal to the noble lord the leader of the Govern-
ment in that house for a day. (Cries of "Go on !")
Sir J. PAKINGTON hoped the noble lord would re-
lease the hon. gentleman tfrom his difficulty. As a mem-
ber of the late Government he wished to say that he did
not shrink from this discussion, and that he would be pre-
pared to meet any charge that could be brought forward.
(" Order, order !")
Lord J. RUSSELL could only say that the Government
business was of such pressing importance, that it would
be impossible for him to assign a day in the meantime.
(Cries of " Go on !")
Mr. H. KEATING then proceeded with his motion,
which was as follows :—" That, referring to the report of
the Select Committee on Dockyard Promotions, and the
evidence upon which it is founded, this house is of opinion
that during the administration of the late Board of Admi-
ralty the patronage of dockyard promotions and the influ-
ence of the Admiralty were used and exercised for political
purposes to an extent and in a manner calculated to reflect
discredit upon that department of the Government, and
to impair the efficiency of the service." He begged to as-
sure the house that he had given notice of this motion
under a very deep conviction that the report recently laid
on the table on the subject of dockyard promotions ren-
dered an expression of the opinion of the house on the
important facts stated in that report absolutely necessary.
(Hear.) When the hon. baronet (Sir B, Hall) brought this
subject originally before the house, he stated in a clear
and able speech that an alteration of an important kind
had been made by the late Board of Admiralty in an unu-
sual, if not irregular, way, with reference to the cancella-
tion of a circular issued by their predecessors which regu-
lated promotion in the dockyards, and he also stated he
had reason to believe that this proceeding was adopted
with a view to the coming elections, and for poli-
tical purposes. After considerable discussion the motion
of the hon. baronet was agreed to, and a committee ap-
pointed. That committee was extremely well qualified
for the task assigned to it, chosen as it was from both sides
of the house, and comprising men of station, great know-
ledge of business, and considerable Parliamentary expe-
rience—(hear, hear)—presided over by a noble lord whose
great talents for business all who came in contact with him
well knew, and whose exalted rank and acquaintance with
official life rendered him peculiarly fit for the discharge of
such a duty. (Hear, hear.) But he had another qualifi-
cation, for he was chairman of the committee which sat in
1848 on tho estimates of the navy, army, and ordnance.
(Hear, hear.) The committee, constituted as he had de-
scribed, ably and faithfully discharged their duty, and the
public at large regarded their proceedings with the greatest
possible anxiety. (Hear.) He did not exaggerate the
state of the public feeling when he said there never was a
committee of that house the proceedings of which were
watched with more interest. (Hear.) The committee
made • their reports to the house, and, confining itself
strictly to the terms of the reference which Chad been made
to it, contented itself with stating facts, and gave no opi-
nion whatever on those facts. In his opinion the com-
mittee acted wisely in so doing. The inquiry committed
to them was one not only of an important, but of a very
delicate matter, and he thought when the terms of the re-
ference to the committee were considered, it would be seen
that they exercised a wise discretion, and that it would
have been too much of that house to ask the committee to
pronounce an opinion on a matter of so much delicacy.
(Hear, hear.) [The hon. gentleman here read the terms of
the motion appointing the committee.] The report which
was laid on the table could only be appreciated after a
very minute acquaintance with the evidence on which it
was founded. It gave no conclusions; but, as a masterly
analysis of the evidence, he had no hesitation in saying
that the report was one of the ablest documents ever laid
on the table of the house. Tho committee had reported
the facts of the case to the house, and those facts, what-
ever aspect any Parliamentary conventional notion might
give to them, wore considered important and startling
by the country at large. (Hear, hear.) It was with a
deep conviction that an expression of opinion on the part
of the house upon those facts deeply involved its credit,
that he ventured to ask the assent of the house to his
motion. (Hear, hear.) He had framed the motion with
a sincere desire to avoid giving to it the appearance
of personal hostility to any person whatever ; and
he need scarcely for his own part disclaim entertaining any
such feeling, for he had not the slightest personal ac-
quaintance with any person nssnii.nosi in tho roport of f be
committee ; and it would be foreign to his nature to wish
to convert a great public question into a personal matter.
Indeed, he felt it would not comport with the dignity of
the house, nor with the feeling of the people of the country
to seek after the precise part taken by any person in any-
thing mentioned in the report, for what was the important
matter was, the system which the report disclosed ; and it
was against that system, and that system alone, that his
resolution was directed. (Hear, hear,) The right hon.
'gentleman opposite, therefore, was mistaken in supposing
that the resolution was levelled at anything more than
what was expressed therein—namely, the system which
was unfortunately adopted with respect to dockyard pro-
motions by the late Board of Admiralty. The house was
aware that in 1847 the state of the dockyards.,attracted the
serious attention of the then Board of Admiralty, presided
over by Lord Auckland. There was no doubt, from the
terms of a circular then issued, that the state of the dock-
yards at that time was such as to be extremely unsatis-
factory, and that was partly, if not mainly attributable to
the circumstance of political influence controling promo-
tions in the dockyards. [The hon. member here quoted
that part of the circular of February 1847, in which the
Lords of the Admiralty expressed their apprehension that
promotion in the dockyards was regarded rather as a mat-
ter of accident or favour than as a reward due to merit.]
In the circular of 1847 rules were laid down, first, with re-
gard to the entrance of apprentices into the dockyards, and
next with regard to the promotion of parties already there.
This circular, as succinctly described in the report of the
select committee which recently sat, expressed the deter-
mination of the Lords of the Admiralty.
" To introduce and maintain a system of promotionunder
which every man who shall have once entered the service
of the dockyards may learn to look to his own exertions as
the only means of future advancement. With the view of
giving effect to this determination, the circular contains a
scheme, according to which, whenever a vacancy offeringan
opportunity for promotion shall occur, the principal officers
of the dockyard are directed to select three names of the
persons who, after examination, shall appear best qualified
to fill the vacancy, and they are required to submit these
names, with a full reportof the respective merits of the can-
didates, to the superintendent of the dockyard. The duty is
then imposed on the superintendent of investigating closely
these returns, and of satisfying himself as to their perfect
impartiality, after which he is authorised to reduce the
number of candidates to two, by striking out the name of
that candidate who he considers least qualified. The re-
port of the superintendent, containing his opinion of the
merits of the candidates, with the original documents an-
nexed, is then to be forwarded to the Admiralty, and the
Lords of the Admiralty announce their intention to be
guided by those reports in the selection of one from the
two names submitted to fill the vacancy."

The effect of that circular was, that the Board of Admiralty
gave up absolutely all patronage with respect to promo-
tions in the dockyards—(hear, hear)—though it reserved
undoubtedly to itself the patronage of original appoint-
ments, or first entrances. With regard to promotions in
the dockyards, the Lords of the Admiralty, by that circu-
lar, parted completely with the patronage beyond the
single act of selecting one of the two names sent up by the
superintendent of the dockyard, and in making that selec-
tion they would unquestionably consult the persons they
made the judges of merit—namely, the superintendent and
the principal officers of the dockyard ; for it would not be
consistent with the spirit of the circular to make a capri-
cious selection, or one based on political preference, with-
out regard to merit. (Hear, hear.) Now, in the early
part of 1849, upon the death of Lord Auckland, the right
hon. gentleman the member for Portsmouth (Sir F'.Baring)
succeeded him as First Lord of the Admiralty, and it
would be an act of injustice, after reading the evidence
given before the committee which recently sat, not to pay
to that right hon. gentleman that tribute of admiration
which was due for his administration of the navy depart-
ment. (Cheers.) During the whole course of his adminis-
tration the right hon. baronet seemed to have had only
one object in view, and that was the good of the public
service. (Renewed cheers.) When the right hon. baronet
was called on to administer the affairs of the Board of
Admiralty, in consequence of a reconstruction which had
recently before taken place in the department of the Sur-
veyor of the Navy, a corresponding change in reference to
the routine business of the dockyards became almost abso-
lutely necessary, and the main matter now for considera-
tion was, what appeared to have been a most unjustifiable
interference with the department of that surveyor. [Here
there were several cries of " Order I" occasioned' by some
diurodue:,inwtahsehouse, and Admiral BERKELEY rose, and
complained that the hon. member for Donegal, Mr.
carrying on a conversation in a tone so
loud as to prevent proper attention being paid to the mem-
ber addressing the house.] It was right that the house
should be reminded of the functions of the Surveyor of
the Navy, and he found that the report of a very in-
fluential committee, which sat in 1848, referred to them,
and stated that the proper application of the sums voted
by Parliament for the navy department depended greatly
on the superintendence of the Surveyor of the Navy, and
that to him was committed the whole control of the dock-
yards, he being required to decide upon the amount of
work and number of artificers required. Such being the
duty of the Surveyor of the Navy, his responsibility was,
of course, great in proportion. When the right hon. gen-
baronet the member for Portsmouth assumed the head of
the Admiralty Board, a change was suggested by Sir B.
Walker, which convenience had rendered absolutely neces-
sary, and !which was subsequently adopted by the First
Lord of the Admiralty. The change was this,—that the
reports of the superintendentsshouldbtehseeAntd(mlirireacltty, to,
atnle
1.
Surveyor, instead of being first sent to
that the Surveyor should then make what was called his
"su
of Septemberbmissioiiont,blBl9.
viTsoscailif yued.out cir-
cularuthnisdooubjbetcetdulltyhletuhte,tawas not technically a board minute, but it was a
..ttipopnrowviechl
,izethmeeFinihrsetrsLoofrdthoef
hthoaerAdd,_nilvirasstuafntz.dsizsci
by the secretary, issued to the dockyards, and acted upon
freao:lSaeolpit:mmboreer,el6B49, until April, 1852. (Hear, hear.)
appeared from the evidence given before the committee
oflglB, that the circular of 1847 (which was subsequently
poa sisMib9ly)'ehoulld the object atlliyntaennddesitlri. nTgheenmtlyenbyhatthheecßoiculyaral
la answered, as far as any regulation of the sort

yards, were, in truth, as the circular of 1847 pointed out,
in a very disadvantageous position as compared with work-
men in private yards. Before 1847, as the circular stated,
political influence affected the promotions of the workmen
apart from their merit, and the object of the circular of
that year was to change the system, and to supply those
pecuniary rewards which were given in private yards, and
which obtained for private yards a decided advantage over
the Royal yards. Among the officer who had given the
most decided testimony to the entire success of that ex-
periment were Captain Milne, Captain Richards, Admiral
Sir T. Herbert, Admiral Parker, Commodore Seymour,
and Commodore Eden, and even the Duke of Nor-
thumberland would be found to have been strongly
in favour of consulting with the Surveyor of the Navy
with regard to dockyard appointments. (Hear, hear.)
Indeed, every officer called before the committee who had
anything to do with the working of the circular bore the
most unqualified testimony to its success. Among the wit-
nesses who gave evidence before the committee on this
subject there was, however, one very characteristic excep-
tion, an electioneering agent—(" hear, hear," and laughter)
—according to whom, not only had the circular had been
insufficient to effect the object with which it was issued,
but political influence had been more rife—or certainly as
rife—in the borough of Devonport since 1847 as ever it
was before. That witness complained that scarcely any
but Whigs were promoted—(a laugh)—and he mentioned
that out of 36 promotions only two of the parties promoted
were Conservatives. Now, the house must recollect that
dockyard promotions took place under the direct super-
vision of the Commodore Superintendent, Commodore
Seymour, a gentleman whom the electioneering agent to
whom he had referred, Mr. Beer, considered to be a Con-
servative. It was most honourable to Commodore Sey-
mour that no one had ever been able to discover, from the
exercise of his authority in the dockyard, what his political
opinions were. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Beer charged the
Admiralty administration of the right hon. member for
Portsmouth (Sir F. Baring) with every species of political
corruption that could exist in the dockyards. Mr. Beer
said that that administration had created superannuations
wantonly and needlessly, for the purpose of making the
appointments consequent upon those superannuations.
Mr. Beer, however, charged against them not only that
they created superannuations needlessly for the purpose of
increasing their patronage, but that they actually super-
annuated men who were Conservatives, while they retained
in full employment men who ought to be superannuated,
because they were Whigs. Mr. Beer mentioned the case
of two men brought up for superannuation, one of whom
was named Honey, and the other Axford ; both of them
were over 60 years of age. Honey had always voted for
the Conservatives, and Axford was a very active partisan
of the Whig side. Honey was told that he was too old,
and must be superannuated, and Axford was kept, though
he was 7 years older, and, as Mr. Beer was told, the inferior
workman of the two. Mr. Beer was asked whether the
superintendent of the yard did not attend the exami-
nation of the men named for superannuation, and his
answer was, "I do not know." He (Mr. Keating) was
informed that these examinations took place in the pre-
sence of the superintendent, of two surgeons, and of
other officers ; and Mr. Beer was therefore, in effect,
charging these gentlemen with a conspiracy for the pur-
pose of superannuating one man and retaining another
of more advanced age and less ability in the public
service. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Beer mentioned also the
case of two persons named Oram and Burt. Burt was
represented to be a Conservative, and Oram a Whig.
Burt, who had previously voted with the Whigs at
the last election, voted for the Conservative candidates,
but flattered himself that his vote was not known to the
master shipwright, to whom he applied for an appointment
at Portsmouth to learn the planing-machine. Burt said
the master shipwright had promised him the appointment,
but Mr. Beer told him that Oram had been selected, and
Mr. Beer evidently wished the comittee to believe that
O shipwrightr ma d beenthat appointed
Burthad upond t
forhe dm
thei sc o ver by t
Conservativehe m a
es
at
ne
didates. It happened, however, that Commodore Seymour
institutedm7.
ananuehi
never
inquiry r
co
anbmeteehne
to subject
tepromised; he
t had
o conclusionß dur
Burt,
he ,
that
ntnwdt
the
emn
t haeapt.
pointment had
Oram had been appointed in consequence of his merit,
twi
rc.h
na so
aurn. u
The) est lo ne afrboluyl
as
ru poefr oirs4t7o
wt haa of h
st
issued
uei pe
ds
fcoorm
the
purpose of placing the Royal dockyards as nearly as possi-
ble upon an equality with private yards, and what was the
18.51-52
2netnhce
re walsVahysa,vifnrogmofllB4369:4ooo7
la.siocotmhepaanreeduawil thex-
penditure for wages—(cheers)—the number of 'teen em-
ployed was reduced from between 12,000 and 0.3,000 to
between 9,000 and 10,000—(hear, hear)—and as large an
amount of work was obtained from the lesser as had been
performed by the greater number. (Hear, hear.) He
thought, therefore, it would be extremely difficult for any
member on the opposition side to contend that the circu-
lars of 1847 and 1849 had not effected the object, for
which they were issued. They had, indeed, the evidence
of the Duke of Northumberland and of the late Secretary
of the Admiralty in favour of the circular of 1847 ; and
the late Secretary to the Admiralty excused the cancelling
of the circular of 1849 on the ground that it would lead to
a return to the system of 1847. On the 2d or 3d of March
last year the Administration of Lord Derby came into
office, and on the 31st of March Mr. Grant, a clerk of the
Admiralty, and private secretary to the late Secretary to
the Admiralty, found himself at Somerset-house, and,
being there he went to Sir B. Walker and requested that
he (Sir B. Walker) would not submit the names of persons
to be promoted into the vacancies for foremen and inspec-
tors of shipwrights in Devonport Dockyard, as Mr. Staf-
ford's political friends were dissatisfied, and he wished to
promote some of their party. Sir B. Walker replied that
he had been upwards of four years in the department ;
that he had never allowed political motives to influence
his submissions to the board ; and he was not going to
commence jobbing for him or anybody else. (Hear, hear.)
Eden, a clerk in the Surveyor's department, entered the
room during this interview, and stated that he heard the
reply made by Sir B. Walker. Now, if this was regarded
as a mere question of accuracy between Mr. Grant and the
Surveyor of the Navy, he (Mr. Keating) thought there could
he no doubt on which side the weight of evidence lay.
The late Secretary to the Admiralty had stated before
the emmultEnet that be had not sent Mr. Grant to make
this communication to the Surveyor of the Navy, and that
statement was confirmed by Mr. Grant. He (Mr. Keat-
ing) had no doubt that Mr. Grant had not been sent on
this mission, but it was wholly inconceivable that a clerk
in the Admiralty should go to the Surveyor of the Navy
and make a proposition of this sort if he had not ascer-
tained, in some shape or way, that the proposition would
not be unpalatable to some of the higher authorities at the
Admiralty. (Cheers.) [Mr. Keating then read the letter
addressed to Mr. Stafford to Sir B. %-alker, stating that
great dissatisfaction existed among his political friends as
to the present arrangement of appointments and promo-
tions in the dockyards, and the answer of Sir Baldwin,
which were published in the report of the recent debates
on this subject.] Now, subsequently the late Secretary to
the Admiralty took credit to himself for having asked Sir
B. Walker for his opinion on this matter, and certainly
the opinion of Sir B. Walker was expressed in the most
distinct terms, about which there could be no mistake.
It appeared, however, that that opinion was asked rather
as a compliment than with any intention of acting upon
it. Sir B. Walker afterwards waited upon the Secretary
to the Admiralty, and a discussion took place between
them as to the tendered resignation of Sir B. Walker. It
was clear that the Surveyor of the Navy had no patronage,
properly so called ; his function was merely to forward the
names sent to him by the superintendent, and to express
his opinion upon the recommendations. It was impossible
to conceive how the object of getting rid of political in-
fluence in the dockyards could be attained by the cancel-
lation of the circular of 1849. Sir B. Walker on the sth
of April had an interview with the Secretary of the Ad-
miralty, and repeated in 'Very strong terms what he had
stated in his letter. A warm discussion took place
between them, and Sir B. Walker stated that the Secre-
tary of the Admiralty said to him there was no blinking
the question, for he was so placed by Lord Derby and the
Chancellor of the Exchequer he could not help himself,
but must have recourse to some change in the system of
promotion. The Secretary of the Admiralty, however,
did not agree with Sir B. Walker, but he said that—as
nearly as he recollected—the words he used that the
Government of Lord Derby and the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would not allow all promotions' to be in the
hands of their political opponents any more than any other
Government. The hon. gentleman attribute. 4 to himself
phrases he could hardly have used, but it really signified
little whether the statement of Sir B. Walker or of the
Secretary of the Admiralty was correct, because, as the
report said, all that was important in the matter was that
the names of these two distinguished personages were used
in a discussion in which the Secretary of the Admiralty
endeavoured to constrain the Surveyor of the Navy to con- ,
sent to an alteration of the system of promotion. The
opinion of Sir B. Walker on the point of promotion ought
to have great weight with the hon. gentleman, and the
hon. gentleman asked him his opinion, and not only re-
ceived his opinion, but also his most positive assurance,
that the change would affect his control over the dock-
yards and consequently their efficiency. Certain persons
whom the hon. gentleman consulted, and who know much
more about the details than the hon. gentleman could have
done, said the cancellation of the circular would not effect
the object the hon. gentleman supposed ; but there was
one object that cancellation could effect, and what was it?
It gave the control to the Surveyor of the Navy with re-
ference to all the dockyards, so that he alone could judge
what vacancies should be filled. The superintendents
were limited to their particular dockyards, bat the Sur-
veyor of the Navy was the person who presided over all
the dockyards. At the time the late Administration came
into office there were between 200 and 300 vacancies kept
principally for the apprentices that were coming out of
their time, and the greater part of these vacancies the,
Secretary was enabled to fill up without the control of the
Surveyor. The consequence was that shortly afterwards,
when 160 apprentices were out of their time, there were
only 34 vacancies left to give them. This was an illustra-
tion of the mischief which was occasioned by the cancelling
of the circular. The hon. gentleman was perfectly correct
in stating that before cancelling the circular he had con-
sulted the First Lord of the Admiralty ; but it appeared
fiom the evidence of the Frat Lord that, although cognizant
Of the step, he gave no directions respecting it, and that he
acquiesced in it only when he thought the power of issuing
the circular belonged to the secretary. Ho (Mr. Keatlng)
had no hesitation in saying that if the question had been
the suspension of tho functions of the meanest clerk or
lbwest porter in the Admiralty, it would have been un-
justifiable to accede to it without surer information and I
better grounds than those which appeared to have
formed the foundation for cancelling this important circu-
lar. (Hear, hear.) It was true that the Board of Admi-
ralty, by their minute of the 26th of April, recognised the
cancelling of the circular. To that extent, therefore, it ;
might be said that the hon. gentleman was supported by
the board. The hon. member then proceeded, amid loud
a.lid continued cries of "Divide !" and other interruptions, I
to refer to the appointnient of Ridgeway, a second-class
leading man at the metal mills, Chatham, to be acting
first-class man, not only without the recommendation of
tho superintendent (Captain Richards), but in the face of
his report that he was unfit for the appointment. This
was a distinct violation of the circular of 1847. (Hear,
hear.) There were 10 cases at that port in which the cir-
eular of 1847 was distinctly violated. At Davenport there
were 12 cases of the same kind. At Deptford there were
also several instances, in ono of which a person who had
boono
dttiplroi
areewevlteiii2tooitnucohsrloyhof
of ctltihiihsaeocdh arged for drunkenness was, by the
order of the Admiralty, directed to bo promoted, against
eight,superintendent.cailrlcu eadrt hoi
no
th
14ethiineam:ber of cases was differed from the
violated for political purposes.s ndo°etkYvirilatsedso. far
every one of these eases the circular question had been ,
(Cheers.) The hon. gen-
tleman the Secretary for the Admiralty had himself stated
that in most of the cases—he (Mr.Reating) took the liberty
of saying in all—in which he had differed from the super-
intendent, he had acted under tho pressure of his political
friends although
o they
v it h
aAe rdt

Mr. BOOKER, amid cries of " Chair" and great confu-
.sion, rose to order. When the hon. and learned gentleman
broadly stated that individuals of blemished character had
been promoted merely for the sake of political purposes—
Order, order Y—and when he stated—(loud and continued.