The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-13 00:00:00

LONDON',

EVENING, JUNE 13, 1851.

Select Committee, which he had meant to move for
adoption as an amendment were, "That in 1792, at the
commencement of the war with France, the number of
admirals was only 69; after 33 years' peace the
present number of admirals is 150, exclusive
of the retired admirals, and of these, 75 of
the effective list are above 70 years of age. A
certain proportion of the list of admirals must
be composed of officers who have grown old in the
service, who deserve well of their country, and who are
entitled to higher rank and to higher pay on account of
their merits, although they are no longer able to servo
afloat; but when it is considered that in the last naval
war with France (the greatest on record), not more than
thirty-six admirals were employed at any one time, and
that at the present moment the services of only fourteen
are required, it would not seem unreasonable that the
number of admirals now fixed, according to the scheme
sanctioned in 1846, at 150, should be gradually reduced
to a number not exceeding 100. Your Committee re-
commend that this gradual reduction should be effected
by promoting only one captain to the rank of admiral on
the death of three flag officers, according to the rule of
promotion adopted in 1830 until the lists shall have been
reduced to the maximum of 100; and thenceforth a csp-
tein may be promoted to fill each vacancy as it occurs on
the lists." On behalf of the naval officers he (Mr.
Hume) felt bound to say that ho considered that rule ex-
tremely herd which made promotion contingent only
upon six years command of a ship in peace and four in
war, seeing that many of them were within five or six
months of that period of service when their command
had expired.
Sir F. BARING said the Hon. Gentleman had asked
him how he could maintain an opinion based on the
plan that had been suggested? His Hon. Friend, how-
ever, did not appear to object entirely to the plan in
question. The Board of Admiralty had recommended a
plan, the principle of which was this:—ln the halt-pay
of the active-list officers had qeen included who were
not on active service. Now considering the large num-
ber of officers unemployed, the country justly com-
plained of the few that were actually on active service,
though, at the same time, they figured on the half-pay
active list. He thought, therefore, it was expedient to
modify the list, so as to have only these on the active
list who were really employed or capable of employ-
ment; removing those who had been placed on the ac-
tive list for good and gallant services, but who, from age
or infirmities, were unable really to perform active ser-
vice. That was the plan proposed by Government.
His Honourable Friend, however, objected to removing
from the list those officers who the Admiralty by
their proposed plan thought advisable should be
removed. But he must remind the House that
it would be impossible to follow out this or
any other plan of reform without doing alleged injustice
and violence to the feelings of certaiwparties. Bet what
injustice, he asked, would be done by the proposed alte-
ration? He contended no injustice would be done what-
ever. On the contrary, the parties affected by the pro-
posed alteration would be placed in even a better posi-
tion. The same chances of service would exist, and
their pay would be placed on a better footing. In the
event of a war, the Crown reserved to itself the right of
placing them on active service, with their own consent.
The very hardship complained of was, that from the
great number of captains it was impossible to find em-
ployment for them. His opinion was that we ought not
to have a greater number of officers than the service of
the country demanded. A proper reduction of the num-
ber of officers was advantageous to the service and to the
country. If the House would permit him to follow out
the new arrangements—which he admitted had been met
with disapproval in some quarters—he firmly believed
they would be found of great advantage to the service
generally. He begged to move the vote of 6,50u1.
Mr. HUME said one great complaint was that parties
who were not in service during the war had been pro-
moted, while others who had been in the war were
passed over.
Sir F. BARING replied, but was not heard in the
gallery,
Mr. WILLIAMS did not approve of the result of
Committees generally. Take, for instance, the Com-
mittee on salaries. They had made certain recommen-
dations, but all those recommendations had been thrown
overboard. He also objected to the practice of one First
Lord of the Admiralty making recommendations, which
his successor, perhaps, would neglect or refuse to carry
out. This system, at least, ought to be modified.
The House ought not to agree to any increase in
the amount of the retired navy list until the House had
sufficient security that the plan would be carried out.
The Government scheme presented a favourable contrast
to the scheme of 1846, which was adopted more for the
benefit of individuals than fur the general interest of the
navy. He wished the Right Hon. Gentleman to get an
order in Council to compel every First Lord of the Ad-
miralty to carry out the proposed scheme of his prede-
cessors. However, he feared that was a request not
likely to be granted. He thought the House ought to
assent to the proposal of Government.
Sir DE LACY EVANS understood that the object of
Government was to promote eventual economy without
impairing the efficiency of the service. These were two
principles which he must always approve of; but he had
been informed that the scheme in question would neither
attain economy nor would add to the efficiency of the
service, because coupled with conditions which involved
the sacrifice of both of these important principles. Now
with regard to efficiency, he had been informed that
some of the later promotions of admirals had been indi-
viduals upwards of 70 years of age. In times of peace
he could not say that an admiral 70 years of age was
not an efficient officer, nor was he inefficient in time of
war. But to come to the cases of individuals, he would
refer to the case of Sir G. Westphal! (we understood),
who had been actively employed during the war, and was
now a most efficient officer, but he was to be set aside
by the new plan as soon as he was made an admiral.
This was insulting the feelings of an efficient officer
without promoting economy, or promoting the efficiency
of the service. There was also the case of Admiral
Watts, who only desired to be employed in the service
of his country, but who could hardly expect, if the plan
was adopted, ever to succeed in his wishes. If the
compulsory part of the clause was not altered, he cer-
tainly must vote against the Government proposition.
Sir G. PECHELL did not think the proposition
likely to effect much good, and he doubted whether the
plan could be carried out for the sum stated. He did not
think due consideration was paid to the commanders and
subordinate officers, though it had been admitted on all
sides that no class of officers were more meritorious.
The expense of the plan would be, not 6,5001. as stated,
but 15.180/. He agreed in what had been said that some
cases of hardship would occur in compulsorily carrying
out the scheme, and thought some consideration ought
to be shown towards such officers as were able and wil-
ling to serve. Some of the officers on the retired list
would be as capable as officers on the active list. Was
he to understand that the Right Hon. Gentleman had
proposed that officers on the retired list might be called
ou again to serve? He should like very much to see a
list of those whom the Right Hon. Baronet stated might
have had a ship, and who consequently would have been
eligible at the present moment for a flag. Within the
last ten or twelve years the service had been governed
by a clique who had made out art active list of their
own.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. S. HERBERT was glad that the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet had undertaken to grapple with this question, though
he confessed he was disappointed with the result.
He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman might improve
the plan if he gave it farther consideration. With re-
ference to the remark of the Hon. and Gallant Officer
who last spoke, he might state that there was no more
widely-spread popular delusion than that everything at
the Admiralty was done by interest. He said so, not
merely with reference to the board with which he him-
self had been connected, but having watched the promo-
tions that had taken place during the time of Lord
Auckland, as well as those made by the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite, he believed there was no ground for
the accusation that Parliamentary or any other influence
had been used to put an incapable officer over the heads
of those whose merits were acknowledged. The ques-
tion of retirement was brought under his notice when
he was at the Admiralty; but the proposal which he had
made did not touch the question of admirals who had
not served for a certain time, because that point was
considered to have been settled by the naval and mili-
tary commission. The necessity of having younger men
, for the flag had been universally admitted. In 1811 the
average age of captains promoted to the flag was only
39. Sir G. Cockburn obtained his flag at 39, and so did
Lord Nelson. The result of the retirement in 1846 had
been so far satisfactory, that it had bettered the posi-
tion of officers by at least five years. He did not see
any advantage in the proposed plan of putting those
officers who had not served six years on a separate list.
He was not sure if the Right Hon. Baronet had stated
that these officers were not to be eligible for future
service.
Sir F. BARING had stated that he thought it advis-
able in respect of admirals and subordinate officers,
that in case of war the Crown should have the power
of placing them, with their consent, on the active list.
Mr. S. HERBERT said that that would not give
them the right to employment in the time of peace; and,
therefore, their position would be worse than it now
was. He was never inclined to stand out for the right
of individuals against the public service; but he must
say be did not see how younger admirals were to be ob-
tained by placing the names of 100 of them on one page
and the names of 50 on another page. Indeed, the plah,
so far from diminishing, would increase the list. In
round numbers there ware 110 admirals on the active
and 40 on the inactive list. It was proposed to buy off
10 from the active list by pensions of 1501. each, and to
leave 100 on the list. The promotion was to be made
from the captains' list by seniority, and the officer who
had served six years was to be entitled to be put on the
active list for any vacancy that might occur. But, sup-
pose there stood at the head of the captains' list five
officers. If the four seniors had not served six years they
would not be entitled to their flag. The fifth would go to
the active list, and his four seniors would go to the inactive,
so that there would be in such a case 100 on the active and
54 on the inactive list. Where no clear and decidedetvine: the
ad-
vantage was to be gained to the public s
rights of individuals ought to be respected.
In the pre-
sent case he saw no advantage separating
beyond making more apparent
in truth,
the names
names of those
officers who could serve,which was, truth, the grievance
of which they complained.
He did not see the object to
ouletiotnepoulttabonef.
.cehrs. would do some vio-
lence gained
to th bye
feelings
of
course
these
owffihit
respect to the other
to die off rather than remove
was worthy of
better to allow the officers
With
the immense
consideration whether
ranks, their
h e
was fromn
ot
cithueitelissut.retihfaht
greatest evil, not onl; to the
he understood
Ho had a strong convictionh
the navy list was
to
of
iitadieviduala. The public service,
but
LI nourable and Gall difficulty was how
to reduce it. The o ant Member opt
ought for justice to the war
officera; but it
posits
be forgotten that at the
ought not to. end of the war a
vast promotion took place, which had clogged the list
cur since. Subsequent proraotious had beca for sub-

sequent services. Promotion was not only a reward
for good service, but it was granted in order to secure
to the country the services of men capable of defend-
ing it in an emergency. The necessity for retire-
merit on the captains' list was indispensable, but in
the inferior ranks of commanders and lieutenants there
was no: the same object, for retirement. lie hoped the
Admiralty would never concede their right of selection,
for in case of a war it would be absolutely requisite to
exercise some such right. It would be bad economy to
establish retirement in those ranks in which it was not
necessary. There were many captains who would be ex-
cluded by this system from their flag, who might other-
wise have obtained it. He thought it was absolutely ne-
cessary to fix the number of captains, and was inclined to
believe that a smaller number was advisable. The more
the list of captains was reduced—provided a sufficient
number were secured—the better would it be for the
service and for the officers themselves.—(Hear.) Look-
ing at the present number, he thought a lower ratio
might be taken. At present there were 75 captains em-
ployed on full pay, and there were 7 in the civil service;
together, 82. Now, he thought a list of 350 unnecessary
from which to make the selection. Even if the number
were treble the list would be ample. Ho should there-
fore suggest the fixing of the active list at a lower
amount. He apprehended that whatever arrangement
was now made it would be binding on succeeding boards.
He should prefer seeing a regular steady annual promo-
tion instead of the present periodical, and, ho might
say, gambling system. He did not know whether the
present Admiralty considered that, as regarded officers
retiring from tho active list, the promotions to the va-
cancies would be on the system of one in three.
Sir F. BARING said that they would.
Ur. S. HERBERT—At present the number of cap-
tains who had accepted the retirement (as the Hon.
Member was understood) was 218, and there was a
prospect of some twenty more also doing the same. He
hoped, however, that the Right Hon. Baronet would
place a limitation to the extent of that retirement, and
that the list should be gradually allowed to die out. By
the system of promotion at present in operation in the
nary it was not one to every three that was appointed,
as was supposed, but one to every two, as it was now in
the army. He would show how he maintained that al-
legation. Assuming, then, that 27 captains had died off,
there would be nine commanders promoted, and, in ad-
dition, there would be four lieutenants advanced to the
rank of commanders. Thus there would be 13 promo-
tions, in all, upon the falling in of the 27 vacancies.
Whatever was done now in the way of arranging the
navy list should be done advisedly and with due consi-
deration, for it should be binding on all future Admi-
ralties. It was the more necessary, therefore, that
ull their plan should be well considered and well
devised ; and he hoped the Right Hon. Gen-
tlensan would not object to reconsider part of it,
so as to render any future change uncalled for
and useless. He would take the liberty of making
a few suggestions on the subject. He would propose to
leave the present Admirals' list, supposing at 150, as a
maximum. But hereafter he would never have the ac-
tive list exceed 100, and when the 150 came down to that
number he would there have it stop. The 150 would in
a very short time come down to the proposed standard of
100, without doing anything of injustice, or inflicting
any unncessary pain upon the feelings of a body of officers
in every way deserving of respect. Ho would wish to
see the captain's list of 350 less than that number, for
that was more than he thought was necessary. On re-
ferring to the number of captains, commanders, and lieu-
tenants at present employed, he found it amounted in all
to 742. He would, therefore, propose for the captains'
active list 250, for the commanders' 300, and for the
lieutenants' 1,000; and that, he thought, would be suf-
ficient for all the requirements of the service. It would
be perfectly easy to make any selection necessary from
these three different ranks. He hoped the Right Hon.
Gentleman would take his suggestions in good part, and
give them due consideration in carrying out his plan.
Sir G. TYLER doubted much whether the plan pro-
posed would have the effect which it was intended, and
which the Hon. Member for Montrose desired it should
have. It had been said that when captains arrived at
the top of their list they were too old, and therefore un-
fit for active service. This had been ascribed to the
great promotions which had taken place in 1815 and
subsequently, which had clogged the list. The proposi-
tion which was now made was, that all those unfit for
employment should be removed to the half-pay list.
Now he would ask them to examine in what that alleged
unfitness might consist. It might proceed from various
causes, and be well-founded or otherwise. Ho main-
tained, however, that the act of placing those who had
not served on the captains' list, out of the chance of pro-
motion, was an act of injustice to the service. The at-
tainment of a rank on the captains' list was always a
great object of ambition in the navy, and if they re-
moved that they would take away one great
incentive to professional advancement. But there
were ways and modes of reducing the cap-
tains' list without doing so much injustice to
the service. An option might be given to captains of
retiring if they wished it. Now, that might be a little
more expensive, but it would clear the list to the extent
required. During the period of the war the average
time for remaining on the captains' list was seventeen
or eighteen years; whereas an admiral made nowa-
days was generally thirty-six years a captain before he
got his flag. He would strongly urge upon the Lords
of the Admiralty the expediency of reconsidering the
arrangements they were now making, with the view of
rendering them more just and conclusive. There were
services, which might be of as much benefit to the
country as any other, in which a naval officer might be
engaged—such, for instance, as the service of the Cus-
toms, or the civil service of the Admiralty ; yet the
length of time a man might be so employed was never
taken into calculation at all. He had been glad to hear
from the Right Hon. Gentleman that in case of war
those who had been placed on the retired list could be
again put on the active list, if they wished it. On the
whole, however, he thought the present plan would be
better to be reconsidered, and it might then be made
less unjust, and more satisfactory to a large class of de-
serving officers.
Sir F. T. BARING said the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite (Mr. S. Herbert) admitted that the Admiralty
had undertaken to grapple with an evil of immense ex-
tent when it proposed dealing with the existing navy
list. When he (Sir F. T. Baring) laid on the table a
plan for the reduction of that list, he wus fully prepared
for a general admission as to tho extent of the evils
which existed—he knew ho should have a great many
compliments as to the good intentions of the Admiralty,
but at the same time was prepared for a general disin-
clination to do anything at all in the matter.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) Ho was told by some Hon. Mem-
bers to reconsider the plan he proposed, yet they had
suggested nothing practical in return. That plan had
not been brought forward without due consideration.
He had last year refused to introduce it until all its pro-
visions could be fully discussed and considered. He was
not prepared to adopt the suggestions which had been
made, and he could moreover inform the Committee
that all the objections urged to the plan of the Admi-
ralty had been before heard and weighed. He could
say that if they intended to do anything effective
in that matter, it was impossible to do anything with-
out dealing with officers high in the service on the
same principle as they dealt with the commanders
and lieutenants.—(Hear.) He thought if any one had a
right to complain of the carrying out of the details of
the proposed plan it was the commanders and those low
in rank; but they heard nothing from those, while the
admirals and captains were pronounced to be a most ill-
used set of individuals. If they took up a principle
they should act upon it equally. Let them reduce their
navy list generally, then, to something commensurate
with the wants of the service.—(llear, hear.) It was on
that class of officers, the commanders, that a grievance
really might be said to press, for they often asked for
service and employment and could not get it; yet no one
objected to placing them, after a certain number of years'
service, on half-pay. When, however, they began to
touch the higher classes of the officers in the service,
they at once were told of the hardship they inflicted,
and every sort of objection was made to the plan. He
was not prepared to deal with the lower class of officers
in a manner different from that on which he dealt with
the higher; and that was his firm determination. They
could not make a reduction in any class without causing
sense inconvenience, loss, or annoyance to some individu-
als. Even in the civil service such could not be effected
without some loss to some one. Now, that was not the
case in what it was proposed to do with respect to
retired admirals, who had, comparatively speaking, no
injustice at all done to them. He did not wish to refer
to individual cases on occasions like that; but as allu-
sions had been made to parties, he would briefly answer
them. What were the real facts of the case of Admiral
Watts? He was a most gallant officer; but though he
had been 34 years a captain he had never served.
Sir DE LACY EVANS—That was not the question.
He complained that they had never employed him, yet
afterwards stated he had not served.
Sir F. T. BARING would ask did the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member think the Admiralty ought to have sent
that Gallant Officer to a command in preference to other
officers ? In that case he maintained that there was no
practical grievance. The public now had some light
thrown upon these matters.—(Hear, hear.) The great
extent of the navy list was an acknowledged evil, and if
many Hon, and Gallant Officers were put upon half-pay
they had no real
grievance to complain,. of.wp—(goer,
yet had )
There was another case, that of bit. G.
had been 30 years on the captains' list, only
served three years afloat.
Sir DE LACY HVANS—He had been three years
couthldat had served
commander of a 50-gun ship, h
ea, aftertoo, could
under Sir G. Cockburn; y
not get em-
ployment.
Sir F. T. BARING would ask whether_ the lion. and
Gallant Member meant to Bay that Si G. Cockburn. was
unwilling to give a ship to Sir G. Wer
thsetpGhaalllianitf applied
r
to for it? Ho tea
yplotyhmouegnht t
would have obtained em if he were anxious for
it, and therefore he was not justified in stating that as a
very great grievance. lie confessed he did not wish to
put forward personal cases in that discussion, but when
they were quoted it hetcame necessary for him to allude
I
somewhat to them.
was very plain, however, that
those officers who were really the most hardly dealt with
were nut those who complained the most. The Right
Honourable Gentleman opposite asked him a question
with regard to the raanner in which he proposed to deal
with the lower elass of officers. Now the- Right Hon.
jGentleman ought to have some experience on that sub-
ect. Yet he had not shown much. There were a large
number of commanders, who, much advanced in years,
had seen a good deal of service; and his (Sir F. T.
Baring's) object was to get a certain number of those
promoted, and then allow them to retire with
the little additional pay of the higher rank, and
with such a mark of the approbation of the Admi-
ralty of their good service as could not fail to be satis-
factory to them. In the discharge of his official func-
tions at the Admiralty he confessed ho had often found
his feelings opposed to his sense of duty; for a necessity
might.sornotimeo exist of appointing a younger man,

who would be fitter for the service, over the head of sa
older one who would be better entitled from seniority
and longer service. There had been some difficulty is
tilling the retired list of 200; but he propessd it should
continue a: that number only until the captains' active
list came down to the proposed limit, and no longer.
Tha:, he thought, was only fair.—(Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite thought the number or,
admirals was too large. Now, the exact number of
that class he had not defined, and was not so easily
fixed. With regard to the captains, however, and the_
commanders and lieutenants, the Right Hon. Gentlema:
had named a certain limit. Th it limit, however, be
did not think sufficiently strong for the requirements oe.
the service. The Right Hon. Gentleman had likewise
said that the present arrangement was to bo con'
sidered final and conclusive. Now, he was by no
sub'
Sequent sure that it was so. Ho thought that if any suer
sequent Admiralty considered the proposed lists
than were required, it was at perfect liberty to r
them, and it would be its duty to propose that
....e4
should be confined to the wants of the service.—(ile°,o
hear.) Nothing, however, could be more injuriotis_:e
the real interests of the navy, and the Efficiency 01,_1ub
service, than to have an overgrown navy.list,
would prevent all fair and legitimate promotion. diffi.
Mr. MACGREGOR admitted that was a YerY-1,34
cult subject; but at the same time it should be come
or,
that an admirals' list was a thing to astonish the w ThlJe
and a matter which Galled for some correction.
Right Hon. Gentleman bad done himself great credal!ilia
attempting to reduce that enormous list; but, in uuute,
:
tion to that attempt, the public should have
some gas'
rantee that that list would never increase more
called
There were altogether :1,504 officers on what was nl, of
the active list; but he contended that a vast numhe'l
theca had no right to be considered members of such_
list. What was the course pursued in
France they had only two admirals, ten vice-atLl:rrai3•
and twenty rear-admirals; making in all thirty aeltu„'oned
Ail the other officers of the same rank were PenTmilar
off, and were never again to be employed.
At
tso other
arrangement was adopted in France with resp.ee-foliand,
officers; and the same system was followed in tee
Sweden, and the United States. The only counlkete
Franc.en?2.
ors:
cept England in which there was a large list of '-
without Go,„i„
without any service was Russia. There were ,3 "";03
rals on the Russian list; but three-fourths of ther'
ge,
persons who had never gone to sea. readily
t?
knowledged, however, that the Right Hon. Gent"Lcroh
the present First Lord of the Admiralty had do "'"
the
to insure economy in our naval expenditure. 510,1 re-
Right Hon. Gentleman had come into office he ea Qat
duced that expenditure by not less than 2,750,0001. .Pht
it appeared to him (Mr. Macgregor) that economy ni_eiti
still be carried to a much greater extent in our I.D4lir
system, and more especially in our dockyards Dna
shipbuilding,
Mr. CORRY said that on the whole he should Pereefrecir
the proposal of the Right Hon. Baronet the First
of the Admiralty to that of the Hon. Member forsYnal.
trose. Ho believed that the rule of requiring that ue
son should have served six years as a captain before , -on.
could be made an admiral, would be productive o;a°
side able advantage to the public, and would :bat it
greater efficiency in the service. It was ie ose of
might operate with apparent severity in the -
tesa
officers who might have served a few months less the
draw
in'
six years; but it was absolutely necessary to "
line somewhere, and cases of apparent harshness f the
dividaals would always be inevitable if any tale °ise
kind was adopted. He wished to know to what P' the
extent the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to reduce
jos
flag-officers, and how he meant to carry out his v
upon that subject? the
Sir F. BARING said that he proposed to reduce,. ce
flag-oflicers to ninety-nine, and to place the other'font
the retired list. But if the Committee should sot s'ol
that proposal, they would have to consider the p1513"0
his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, to vi:00,
he confessed that he entertained considerable object' or
Mr. S. HERBERT said that the Right Hon' Gen
'e'
man had stated that he wished to extend the same eeslet
ciple to captains which he would adopt in the !Iron
commanders and lieutenants; but the fact was that,
the different nature of the two cases, it would be lt°9
sible rigidly to carry out the principle.
After a few words from Colonel bIBTHORF, the
Mr. HUME said that he had no wish to opPoseei
Government for mere oosition sake. He believed tb
00l
pp
had at present entered on the right course, and he
complained that they did not strictly adhere to it' ns to
observed that the system of promotion by brevets wtlot,
brought to a close, and he very much rejoiced as boa
for ho believed that the system in q
tauestion ha of
productive of the greatest abuses. The Committee
18'13 had recommended that that system should c,Leri
and yet, in the year 1837, there had been 193
en".thsts
promoted by brevet in the navy; in the year 1838 ;here
had been 170 officers promoted; in the year 1841 7846
had been 293 officers promoted; and in the year fol
there had been 246 brevet promotions. 'DI prto
was, that the system of promotion which had hither
tod
been adopted in the navy was only calculate er
ensure the advantage of individuals at the 693
pease of the public. It appeared that oat toot
captains, in the year 1840, not less than 313 had ',bet
seen any service since they had been promoted to t 492
rank; and out of 807 commanders, not less than ge
had not served since their promotion to the Past:, eot
was aware that the present Board of Admiralty v"""h„,e0
to be blamed more than its predecessors for their„ltee
of the system. Under all boards aristocratic inalte 01
prevailed, and promotion was given in conseetlethZieh
powerful family connexion. Men were raised to ",/
posts in the navy while their services were in n° A-,60
required by the country, and then they were placed his
half-pay, and became a burden on the public. 113, "0
opinion they ought to have a fixed number of offiet ice
the navy, as they had in the army; and then a n" -a
would be put on the unlimited abuse of patrons Vii,
that branch of the public service. The Board of il",;00
ralty at present possessed arbitrary powers of protn°`h'er
in the navy, such as neither her Majesty nor any °ia
authorities possessed in the army. He should farl'n,i 0
say that he could see no necessity for our maintaining if
many as 100 admirals, and he believed that it would sonie,
be lair and reasonable to reduce their number to 50. d
the height of the war we had had only 30 admirals. °-
not more than 14 of them had been employed. rest
Admiral GORDON said ho was aware of the g-eel
difficulty of devising any means of dealing with te
question which might not appear to operate severall,
ecl
against some individuals. But it should be reinelnu,e"f
that it was the paramount duty of the Admiralty t°, ,
o
curd the services of efficient officers. He knew of
batter means of affecting that object then the adoetl"e,
of an extensive system of retirement in time of Peru,
Without any wish to say anything that could be °l-1,,;,‘
sive to individuals, he believed it naight with pet
truth be stated that not many of our admirals at presello
possessed that activity of body and of mind which han,
eminently characterised our admirals throughout thi
war. He should be glad to find the plan of the Ad nibs
ralty, as explained to them that evening by the Big r
Honourable Baronet, come into operation at an ear d,
period than the Right Hon. Gentleman had proPol'it
The plan would come into effect so gradually that
would not afford an early opportunity of bringing
4
forward young and efficient officers. He thought
that some mochtication might reasonably be made ,
jtl
the proposal, under which a service of six years vroe"e
be required on the part of captains before they CO
be promoted to the rank of admirals. In his opinion
the time ought to be reduced, or a service of a coin'
mender ought to some extent to be allowed to count
in the matter. But, in any case, he thought that the
service required should be an active, and not a mere)/
nominal one.
Sir DE LACY EVANS said he believed there iv°
a general determination on the part of the Committee
to aid the Admiralty in carrying out their vied
upon that subject ; but there was also a general will'
that the compulsory provision should not be carried into
effect.
Sir G. PECHELL said he had been challenged in
suggest a plan, but he had suggested one in 1848'
He wished to call the attention of the First Lord 0,
the mode in which freight money was now disposal
of. At present very few had the benefit of it. Teo
advantage was confined to a few aristocratic
la"
mulles. In one instance a sum of 17,000/. had bean
divided between the captains of_
.seven ships. He had' year after year, pressed this Subject on the attends'' of the House.
Mr. CO BDEN said it was generally understood, when a Committee was appointed on the navy estimates, that
-
it
the
aonitiecitlewielts to reduce expenditure, and not to increase
admittedraendti thonoaft y
that Committee should not be
acted on. Ile
ad heard no good reason wh the recour
very great difficulty would be found in
dealing with the claims of officers long in the service'
who had entered it expecting certain advantages from the
wayisthte.many view then
would find en
in
existence.
The most ardent reformer
it extremely difficult to deal with this dal
to
of immediate saving. He merely wished
stipulate that the public should have all future advall:
tage to be derived from a changeof system. I;e
°
minute w.
of council of 1830 recommended that they should
diminish the number of admirals, coupled with a recom-
mendation to diminish the number of cadets. If they
neglected to act upon this they would find themselves 10
years hence in the same predicament as now. The Coln'
mittee recommended that in fixing the number of cadets
a margin should be left for the exercise of discre'
tion, for the effect of an invariable rule would 10,
to make the number too great for the wants 01
the service in one year, and too small in another;
One hundred was the number suggested by Lord
Auckland, and this appeared to the Committee to
be the maximum number which ought to be allowed
in a time of peace. If there was not employment for
them, the same rule should be applied to the officers
of the navy which was applied to the civil service:
and if they were not wanted, the public would not Pat
them in any shape. Therefore the Admiralty would an
justice to the public and justice to the young men theta'
selves who had entered the serviee injudiciously by re-
ducing the number much below that amount.
Sir F. T. BARING said it Was quite true that 100 was
stated to be sufficient.
Mr. COI3DEN-100 was the maximum.
Sir F. T. BARING said when he came into office, 114,8
found that Lord Auckland had fixed the number at 10"
in accordance with his opinion. His (Sir F. T. Barinea)
experience during two years led him to believe that the;
would not want that number; in fact, the Admiralty tin
'
already diminished it. After persons had entered the
service any stop to promotion must interfere with their
expectations when they joined the service• and be:
therefore, concurred in the opinion that the restrain'
shoulde. be exercised in preventin too many frown
entering the service, which would ginflict hardship -13
no one.

Sir W. JOLLIFFE protested against a rigid ad-
herence to an order in council, which would operate is
juriously on a certain class of officers; and hoped 1,1)1
Government would reconsider their determination in Oita
respect.
Sir F. T. BARING could not consent to Alter the
plan of the Government.