The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-12 00:00:00

Stirling joined Captain Elliot with c, flag. hip and a large
frigate on the .7th of June. That should have rendered
our squadron overwhelMin. They remained together
from the 7th of Jane till the '7th-20 days—and during

or five times a-day, Ito that during the last five years the
Surveyor of the Navy had positively, lived in a cab—
(laughter)—perhaps not slept in it, but he was always
ridiug backwards and forwards flour one establishment to
the other. One house bad been taken from a junior lord,
but it took five years to effect that change, and how much
longer it would take to get.possession of the other house
for the public service it was impossible to say. Some very
splendid buildings had recently been erected at Somerset-
house, and if the money which had been spent there had
been applied to extend the Admiralty the whole establish-
ment could have been removed to the latter place, and
room left at the foriner for the Inland Revenue and other
departments. He mie;•ht be told, as was sometimes said,
that the foundations of the Admiralty were unsound, but
was it not possible to find an engineer who could drive in
a few piles and make a foundation? He would take away
the houses of the first lord 'and of the first sea lord and of
the second sea lord, and would, in addition, extend the
Admiralty into the gardens behind, which would then
afford sufficient room for the whole establishment. The
right hon. member for Carlisle once proposed a reformation
of the Admiralty, which the right hon. baronet (Sir C.
Wood) said was opposed by Sir G. Cockburn, That was
true, and Sir G. Clerk also opposed it, because they fore-
saw what had really 'taken 'place, that there would be no
responsibility upon any ono. According to the act of Par-
liament, he believed there Were only two persons who could
legally sign at the Admiralty. But both the secretaries
signed letters, two lords signed letters, although the act of
Parliament prohibited it. lie had received letters signed
by the secretaries- by two lords, and from a clsrk named
Prosy—(a laugh)—front Mr. Grant, the head of the Vic-
tualling Department; from Mr. Dundee, the head of the
Stores Department ; and he thought from others ; all of
which was contrary to the act of Parliament and ought to
bo prevented. There were at present six lords of the
Admiralty. The first lord had the general surveil-
lance of all departments. The senior naval lord took
charge of the ships and the surveyor's department. One
lord had charge of the victualling department nominally;.
another had charge of the stares and the medical depart-
ment ; while the civil lord had charge of the Accountant-
General's department. . Sir G. Cockburn said that each
lord was to a certain degree responsible for his department,
but it happene often that a commander-in-chief received
letters of a contrary nature. If the naval department was
to be properly constituted, the Controller of the Victualling
Department should be responsible for his department, as
should the Controller of Stores, the Accountant-a: eneral, and
others, for their respective departments. That would enable
the country toldisper se with three Lords of the Admiralty,
and if a first lord and tree others were loft to attend to the
discipline of the fleet they would have the public sereice
ranch better conducted. The First Lord of the Admiralty
said on a former night, that nine-tenths of the matter re-
ferred to by the hon. member for Bath had nothing to do
with the navy, and instanced beef and pork, as if the navy
was not fed upon beef and pork. Some lords of the Admi-
ralty, when first appointed, 'did not know a brig from a fri-
gate, and the naval lords were occupied in teaching these
their duties ; thus it became necessary for heads of depart-
ments to sign papers, or the whole machine would stop.
But the Board of Admiralty always told the house every-
thing went on in beautiful order, and then one lord got up
and praised himself, and then another praised himself, and
every one of them declared that everything was carried on
in the most perfect manner. But, if they took the trouble
to inquire Of any of those who had been at Somerset-house,
but had' now left it, and were therefore able to speak out
boldly, they would learn that nothing could be more un-
satisfactory than the state of confusion which at present
existed, and that, if a board of the cleverest men in the
world were chosen, it would be impossible forthern to go to
work efficiently. He saw hon . gentlemen opposite taking notes
and preparing to attack him, but let them go where they
pleased, inquire of those competent and able to speak,
and they would learn that what he bad stated was true.
Sir George Cockburn's was a better plan than the one now
followed. That gallant officer recommended—and he (Sir
C. Napier) hal else often recommended— that the Rear-
Admiral of Great Britain, who held at present a sinecure
appointment, should he placed at Somerset-house at the
head of the Victualling Department, that the whole cor-
respondence of that department should pass through him,
and that he should be entirely responsible for its conduct.
At the head of the Store and Surveyor's Department should
be placed the Vice-Admiral of Great Britain, who also
held a sinecure appointment., and who ought also to bo
entirely responsible for the management of those depart-
ments. These, he believed, were substantially the sug-
gestions of Sir G. Cockburn, and one great advantage
would undoubtedly result if they were acted-upon. Every-
body knew how essential it was that the outports should
be frequently visited. At present, when the Admiralty
paid such a visit, it was nothing more than a party of
pleasure, and the board ran through the dockyards as fast
as they possibly could, in a manner which was certainly
not calculated to elicit accurate information as to what
went on. Now, if the Rear-Admiral of Great Britain
wore sent down to the outposts, hp would be senior in
rank to• all the admirals iu command there, and would go
through the different offices, the victualling, the medical,
an 1 other departments, spending, perhaps, a week or ten
days in each place ; the vice-admiral would do the same
thing; it would not be necessary for them to drag down a
whole board with them, with- a secretary tacked on to
their tail; and these persons would send for the various
officers, and would enter into a thorough examination of
each department inspected by them. Such a visit would
be productive of real benefit, and would lead to much
greater economy in this portion of the national expentli%
tare. He had conversed frequentleewith people who had
been Lords of the Admiralty, and, though he could not
allude to them by name, all seemed to agree that the board
as at present constituted was most inefficient. There were
more complaints against this board than all the other boards
put together. Look at the way in which private ships and ship
yards are managed. Our great shipowners had servants who
thoronghly understood their business ,and the whole system
of management was far better than that of the Admiralty.
The right hon. gentleman (Sir C. Wood) had quoted the
other night from a letter of his published 26 years ago,
'when Sir James Graham was at the head of the Admiralty,
in which he said that the welfare of the navy depended so
much upon the manner in which it was administered, that
we had only to refer to the discipline of our ships, and if
they were found in a high state of etliciency—well built,
I well found, well officered, and well manned—it might ho
surmised that the navy was conch-fated by just and expe-
riencad men. But the right hon. gentleman should have
quoted further.. He went ,on to say that if, on the other
hand, we saw a gamma relaxation of discipline, no emula-
tion, no zeal, and the generality of ships in bad order, or in
no order at all, we might pronoutce without hesitation
that the Admiralty were unjust and partial in their selec-
tions for command, that promotions were conferred from
political considerations, and that there was a total exclu•
sion of meritorious old officers. He did not mean to say
that the navy was in this condition now, and he acknow-
ledged that the right hon. gentleman had done a great deal
to improve it. Even now, however, its affairs were far from
being administered as they ought to be, and there was not
a Lord of the Admiralty-who did not know this as well as
he did. If he mistook not the senior naval lord, with whom
he had often held conversation upon the subject, would
agree with him upon this point. But he thought he had
said enough about the Board of Admiralty. Not that he
entertained the smallest hope that it would have any effect
upon that house. (A. laugh.) Members of the Board would
doubtless get up and say, as had always been said when
the naval administration was impugned, " The navy was
never better conducted than •at the present moment."
Let the house, however, only order the subject to be
examined into by. a committee, and he should be infi-
nitely surprised if they came to the conclusion that the
management of the navy was satisfactory. With regard
to the construction of the Board of Admiralty, he would
appoint a Commander-in-Chief of the fleet, and a
Captain of the fleet, with , the, requisite number
of secretaries ; their duties should be restricted entirely to
matters concerning the discipline of the fleet, together with
the necessary promotions; and the Vice and Rear-Admirals
of Great Britain ought ao be constantly with them, and to
take their orders from them. That was the way in which
he would caustruct the, Board of Admiralty. • But if Go-
vernment saould continue 'obstinate and refuse to adopt
his plan upon the notion that alt naval officers were unfit
to take the first station at such a • board, why, then, let
them appoint the right hon. baronet at the head of it, and
if they pleased let them take two other lords from the
benches opposite, but let there he a certain number of naval
lords who should sit by themselves for strictly naval pur-
poses. The right hon. bardnet had given the committee a
survey of all that he had. done fot the navy. Many things
had been done—some of them good curl some bad. During
Sir R. Peel's Government he (Sir; C. Napier) submitted a
plan on which the retiring -list should be established.
Many of his euggestione were carried out by that Govern-
ment, bet not all of them; nor were those which were
adopted effected in the manner he wished. Some time
after-carne a new First Lord of the Admiralty, and he pro-
posed another list. Some admirals in formet days had been
forced to retire without adequate pay. The Duke of Cla-
rence, eshen he became Lord High Admiral, saw the cruelty
of this, And he placed all those who had • retired against
their will again on the list. Well, then came another
First Lord of the Admiralty, and by him all 'those who
had, been restored from the retired list were again` taken
off,' end again put on the retired list: -If the Government
had followed the system he recommended, no man would
have gone off' the list Without' his own consent. But
there Was another plan which be had proposed, and which
he thought better in all respects, both for the individuals
and for the service itself. There were a great many
admirals or the list who were too old for service. Now,
his plan would be to do away with all distinctions
between vice-admirals anal rear-admirals, and to .cell
them, all alike, 'admirals, and pay them aOOl, a-year ;
and when the.. Admiralty wished to employ an ad-
iniral theycoubrsolect whomsoever they please], and from
whatever rank they pleased. This plan might be easily
ac-
complished without costing the country any money what-
ever. With respect to the position of the masters in the
navy, that had of late bean very much improved ; but, still
Sufficieat encouragement wes not given to that very impor-
tant class of officers. If, as masters, they performed a gal-
lant action they were eligible to the post of lientenalb, but
they only ranked according to the period at which they
were appointed, andolot according to seniority. Now, he
was of opinion that a master who had served sufficiently
/ long to entitle him to the rank of lieutenant, and who by
his gallantry in fight was . deemed worthy of promotion,
,should not be obliged to take the rank of lieutenant, but
should be at once promotedao.the rank of commander. As
.to boanty, it was his opinion that it would be much better
to give 301. or 40/. to a tried seaman to induce him to enlist
than to 'spend it iu training a landsman to make him fit
for sea. If they were well treated sailors preferred a man-
of-war to a merchant ship; and he did not doubt that it
they gave a bounty they would obtain many more trained
seamen than they did at present. It was said that if you
gave a bounty tho sailors would spend it in drink. That
objection applied with much greater force to the gratuities
which were now given upon landing to sailors who had
conducted themselves well. Such gratuities were generally
spent in drink'; but a bounty would in most cases be ex-
pended upon' necessary clothes and outfit. The right. hon.
baronet (Sir C. Wood) had dono a great deal of good, ape
he (Sir C. Napier) hoped-that he would persevere. At the
same time, he could not attach much importance to the
fact that the right hon. baronet never promoted an offiser
without consulting his Board. It wan not likely that the
Board would refuse to sanction anything which was re-
commended by the Firsts Lord.
Sir F. BARING defended the system of compelling
admirals who had not served a certain period efloat
to go upon the reserved• list. . That rule Yea, laid down
by the Duke of Clarence velien' Lot d High Admiral, and
e.day was issued
Was afterwards forced upon the Government ey com- ARMY AND :NAVY---is
requirevii
ster
to be voted in the
mittee of, the House of Commons. He denied that officers an estimate of the sum
ah 1857, to make good the
were employed from political influence. year 1856, ending '3lst Mar
Mr. H. BAILLIE —AS naval affairs again engage the deficiency of the vote of last session, for defraying the
attention of the house, I May beepermitted to observe that expenditure of the Mint for the various Medal Ser-
e veniueeT asked the First Lord of the Admiralty
on Friday vices in the year ending 31st March, 1856. The sum
a question, to which. I have net as vet received an answer,
with reference to the opeiationa of Admiral Stirling in the, f , referred to is 80 000/. . Tee sum of 52,500/. was voted
China seas. asked wiiether lit bon. gentleman or this service last session, but it having been sub-
wes prepared to ley upon the • a th) ,111 the p pore 11-1(1 e sequently decided to present the Crimean medal to the
respondence relating to these transaotions ; and that in- troops of the Allies, the provieion• made was inadequate,
entry I now repeat, because a dtatement ha eon pub:. and the sum of 80,09.0 J. is required to carry- on the
lashed by Captain Whittinghane; which rend le explan work- at the Mint to the 31 tof March, 1856. The
tion necessary, 'Captain Whittinghain itnteltillit Admiral expanse of army and navy medals will henceforward be
= ' reyided for ant t 4 Intimates for the two :mica.

the greater portionOi the time they were lyltig off De Cas--
tris Bay. On the 27th Of June they receiveat orders to sail
for the south, never -having attempted, to search for the
Russian squadrode -and they afterwards learnt from Rus-
sian prisoners that oe that day, late as it then was, only one- .
half of-their (the Russians') ships had got through the pas-
sage, the vessels having never been so much as reconnoitred.
So it appears that ep to that time Admiral Stirling had
never reconnoitred the passage through which the Russkn
ships effected their escape, and that, if he had done so,
even then he would have found one-half of them still there.
I should thank the First Lord of the Admiralty to inform
the committee whether he intends to lay the despatches on
the table ; and, if so, when l
Sir C. WOOD said that there were one or two points to
which, before replying-to the hen. member's question, he
desired to allude in the order in 'which they had occurred
during the debate. It had been more than hinted that he
had got some friend to write him a letter, giving a flourish-
ing account of the state gtf the navy; but for this suspicion
there was not the slightest foundation in truth. The letter
to which he had referred was one written 25 years ago by
the gallant admiral opposite to the right hon. baronet the
member for Carlisle, at that time First Lord of the Admi-
ralty. The reason why he (Sir C. Wood) had referred to
it was simply that he desired to claim the benefit of a doc-
trine set forth in it—namely, that the state of the navy
might be' taken as a fair test of the efficiency of the Admi-
ralty. In reply to the complaint that boys were not taken
in sufficient numbers into the navy, it would suffice to say
that upwards of 2,000 had been admitted in the course of
the last year. Allier the insinuation of the hon. and gal-
lant admiral opposite, that the Lords of the Admiralty
held in private very different opinions with respect to the
condition of the navy from those which they avowed in
public, he begged to say that, as far as he was himself
concerned, this was not so. He always said what he
thought. (Hear.) With regard to the question of slops,
he could only say that a number of officers and seamen had
been asked to choose the material which they considered
best without reference to cost, and that which they had
chosen had been adopted. ,
Mr. BENTINCK. deprecated the practice of appointing
a civilian to the post 'of first Lord of the Admiralty.
Mr. BAILLIE hoped that the right hon. geutlemanthe
First Lord of the Admiralty would answer the question
which ho bad put to him.
Sir C. WOOD said that it wag not convenienCto answer
descriptionquestions of that in committee, but he would
answer it on a future day.
The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 1,434,7301. for provision fer seamen and
marines, a vote of 2,00i1. lls. 74. for scientific purposes,
and a vote of '20,000/. for the Naval coast Volunteers,
were agreed to.
On the vote of 153,795/. for the salaries of officers and
contingent expenses of the naval establishment at home;
Mr. MAGUIRE said it 'was his intention to have brought
forward at a future period what he should now complain
of. It was his duty to call the attention of the committee
to the unfair distribution of the public. expenditure as
ap-
plied to England and 'lreland. The great national re-
sources of the harbour of Cork were neglected, though it
was admirably adapted for the building and repairing of
ships. He 'did not, as a beggar, ask that Ireland should
enjoy a portion of thepublic expenditure, but he demanded
it as a right. Of the 3,6.3a,010/. which the house was asked
to vote for Admiralty purposes, only 4,500/. was to be ex-
pended in Ireland.
Sir C. WOOD said that the.hon. gentleman seemed to
think that the public expenditure should be equally dis-
tributed over all parts of the country. He (Sir C. Wood)
lived in the north of England, and the people there did not
consider themselves exceedingly . ill-treated because there
was no:dockyard in the. Humber or Mersey. He thought
that dockyards Should only be formed and maintained at
those places which were most convenient for the public
service, and he did not think that it would be for the con-
venience of the public service that dockyards should be
formed either at Cork or in Scotland, or in the Humber or
Mersey. He was fully aware of the merits and beauties of
Cork harbour. ,He must say that a more beau.
tiful spot; or a better harhoiir, ho had seldom seen.
He was not "aware that the Rosamond steam-
sloop, had arrived at Cork with a broken shaft. As
soon as the vessels had returned from the Baltic,
the Admiralty had directed that they should be dispersed
among the different ports of the country to raise men. At
Dublin there were now one
.ship of the line and two fri-
gates ; at Waterford one large steam-frigate; and at Gal-
way a frigate. He hoped that these vessels would be suc-
cessful in raising men. But he must add that the only
principle which he would act upon in these matters was to
do that which was meet conducive to the interests of the
empire at large. (Hear.)
Colonel DUNNE h_iet-that Ireland had a right to these
naval establishments, and. tho 'time might come when the
Government would see the expediency of doing her justice.
Mr. JOHN M'GREGOR said that ha had listened with

—.---
great Fatisfaction to the speech of the right hon. gentleman
the First Lord of the Admiralty, and be believed that no
Minister was more anxious to do that which he considered
right and just than the right hon. gentleman. (Hear,
bear.) He (Mr. John M'Gregor) would not gointo the
question of taxation, ' for he -thought that no change
could be made in our administrative system until the re-
turn of peace. Great-injustice had been done in not mak-
ing use of Cork harbour for, naval purposes. He would
suggest that the establishment at Deptford should be re-
moved to Cork. It would be remembered that during the
last war Cork harbour was the great rendezvous for our
commercial fleets whilst waiting for convoy.
Mr. MAGUIRE said a more fallacious and flimsy answer
than that of the right hon. baronet (Sir C. Wood) had never
been given by any First Lord of the Admiralty. Cork har-
bour was eminently calculated for a dockyard, and, by means
of the electric telegraph, the Admiralty could communicate
with Cork from Whitehall in the space of ono minute.
Mr. SPOONER asked for some explanation with regard.
to the sum charged for Roman Catholic chaplains for the
navy.

Sir C. WOOD said he was prepared to justify that vote,
which, he thought, was right and proper. There were a
great number of Roman Catholic sailors serving in the fleet,
many of whom came from Ireland. Divine service was per-
formed in all vessels according to• the rites of the Church of
England, but of course Roman Catholic sailors were not re-
quired to attend that service. lewas.most desirable that all
persons in the fleet should have au opportunity of attending
Divine worship on Sunday in such manner as was consistent
with their faith and belief, but, on the other hand, it was
not advisable that they should be landed and introduced to a
town, in order to seek out some-place of worship.
Mr. SPOONER could not give his consent to any such
vote, but would not trouble the committee to divide.
After some observations from M 4, M'Caun, Mr. R. Blake-
more, Mr. Kinnaird, Sir O. Wood, and Mr. Vance,
. .

The vote was agreed' to:
The next vote, 1,100,309/. for wages of artificers, was
agreed to.
A vote of 109,1131., for wages in her Majesty's establish-
mouts abroad, was agreed to. . . . .

The next vote, for,Uoo,ooo/ for naval establishments, was
agre, a to.
The next vote, for 864,334/.. for the establishment at Key-
ham, was agreed to.

Upon the vote of 655,4211. for half-pay, reserved half-
pay, and retirements to officers of the navy and royal ma-
rines,
Sir C. NAPIER wished to know why 31. 3s. per day was
voted for an admiral of the fleet, when there was no such offi-
cer appointed?
Sir C. WOOD said that it was intended to make that ap-
pointment only for distinguished services ; at the same time
it was thought desirous to have the vote in case the office
should at any time be filled up. The money voted remained
in the exchequer.
Captain SCOBELL saw no reason why an admiral of the
fleet should not be appointed. It was a position on a par with
that of field marshal, alai it was only fair to the naval pro-
fession that the post should be filled up.
Sir C. NAPIER thought that no distinction should be made
between the different ranks of admiral. lie would have them
all placed on one list, and let the Board of Admiralty select
whom they pleased for active service ; and when they with.
drew front active service again, let them have the half•pay
according to the rank which they held before.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said that he found an increase of rear-
admirals in the reserved list and the retired list which he
could not account for. In 1853 the number on the retired
list was 113, now it was 133.
Sir C. WOOD explained that the retired list was fixed at
200 odd, but with regard to the reserved half-pay there was
no fixed number, Before a captain could receive the retiring
•
pay of a rear-admiral, he must have. served a certain number
of years. When a vacancy in the retired list took place, the
first on the captains' list would be appointed, provided he
had served the required number of years ; if he had not, he
would be placed upon the reserved list, and the next one in
order, who had served the required number of years, would
be appointed ; so that by this means the number on the re-
served list would vary according to circumstances.
The vote was then agreed to.
The following votes were agreed to without discussion ;-
494,363/. for pensiond and allowances.
147,685/. for civil pensions and allowances.
609,600/. for salaries and expenses of transport service ;
for victualling and carrying troops ; for expense of prisoners
of war, &e.
On the question that 756,4871. be voted for charge of
.packet service,
Sir E. PERRY said' that the Government had denuded
themselves of a great amount of dockyard patronage, and
that as it was to be. 'hoped this was to .be a permanent ar-
rangement, ha begged to suggest whether it might not be
embodied by an Order in Council, to prevent future Govern-
ments from returning to the former objectionable system.
Sir C. WOOD observed that when he was Secretary to the
Admiralty 20 years ago„the appointments were so jobbed by
the superintendents that' the Admiralty took 'hem from
them. He believed, however, that the superintendents now
exercised their trust faithfully and honourably, and as they
were responsible to the Admiralty, the board did not deem it
advisable to take the patronage from them.
Sir C. NAPIER complained that the right hon. baronet had
not answered the question of the hon. member behind him
(Sir E. Perry).

Sir C. C. WOOD-I said that it was not advisable to carry
out his sugges'ion.

Sir C. NAPIER—I think it very advisable. (Laughter.)
There ought to be an Order in Council to put an end to the
system immediately. While I was absent at dinner the sala-
ries of the Lords of the A•iniralty were voted,, and I should
like to know why three of the lords get 1,0001. a year and
the fourth 1,200/. a year?
Sir C. WOOD—It occurs in this way • one lord is allowed
for a honse.

Sir C. NAPIER--Then• why should they not all have allow-
ances for houses? What is good for the goose is good for the
gander. (Laughter.)
Sir C. WOOD was about to explain further, but
The CHAIRMAN said the discussion was quite irregular,
as the vote LA been agreed to'while the gallant admiral was
absent.
The vote for the packet service, was then agreed to, and the
house resumed.
COURT OF CHANCERY (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr..l. D. FITZGERALD moved that the second reading of
this Ell be fixed for Friday next.
The second reading was accordingly postponed till Friday.
The House of Commons Officers Bill was read a third time
and passed, .
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned at a quarter past 11 o'clock.