The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-25 00:00:00

and men. When the captain was forced, from the smallness
of his means, to order a chop and potato for dinner, there
was a great quizzing at the galley, and he was called " a

poor, miserable, shabby devil." (A laugh.) It was impossi-
ble for a captain to furnish his quarters on board ship, even
in the most economical manner, for less than £3OO. It

was quite true that the Admiralty supplied officers with
linen and plate, but they charged more than a Jew's price
_ _

for them. He would certainly vote for the commission
with his right hon. friend, and he hoped it would inquire
not only into the 'position of the higher class of officers,
but also into that of the warrant and petty officers and sea-
men, whose condition undoubtedly required amelioration.
He trusted also that the commission would not neglect
to inquire into the provision made for warrant offi.

cers' widows, which was quite disgraceful. (Hear, hear.)
It was absurd to hope that political interest would ever cease

under any administration to have its effect on the disposal
of patronage, but surely merit and seniority ought not to
be entirely overlooked. In France so many officers were
promoted by seniority, and so many by what was called

" selection." That was a question the commission would do
well to consider. The noble and gallantlord (Lord C.Paget)
had told the house that they had better leave the matter to
the Admiralty, and that he was going to do a great deal
next year. But the Admiralty was a moveable body, and
perhaps the noble and gallant lord might not be in office
next year to fulfil his promise. (A laugh.) Besides, experi-
ence warned them that very antiquated notions prevailed at
the Admiralty, and that a question of this kind could not

be left entirely to its discretion. The noble lord had asked
why, if the right hon. gentleman complained of so little
having been done, ho did not do more when he was at the
Admiralty. It was only fair, however, to remember that the
right hon. gentleman (Sir J. Pakington) effected mach, and,
if he had remained in office, would have done a great deal
more. He did not think that the right hon. gentlemanwas
open to the charge brought against him by the noble lord,
of causing discontent among the officers of the navy. He
had, on the contrary, endeavoured to ameliorate their
position, and had left a bright example for his successors
to follow, which he was sorry to say they had not done.
The noble lord's attack upon the right hon. gentleman was
both unjust and ungenerous. If the noble lord
could show that the present Board of Admiralty
had been more successful in its administration than the
last there would be some reason why the noble lord should
find fault with the naval administration of the right
hon. gentleman. Before the noble lord came into office he
made many most severe accusations against the late Boards.
He accused them of spending £5,000,000 in 11 years, either
improperly or without accounting for it. The noble lord
was not able to justify that accusation before the committee,
but he had never withdrawn the charge. The noble lord
was mistaken in asserting that his speeches had caused dis-
content in the navy, and that he had gone about among
the sailors to excite discontent. He had, on the contrary,
kept away from the men, for the express purpose of avert-
ing such a charge. When the noble lord said that corporal
punishment should be done away with, he did more harm
to the service than he would ever be able to do good. He
should support the motion for a commission, and he trusted
it would be composed of men who really knew the service,
and who were not afraid to speak their minds to the Admi-
ralty. If, however, the recommendations of such a com-
mission were only to be partially attended to, like those of
the Manning Commission and, the Greenwich Hospital
Commission, then it 'would be better not to appoint a com-
mission at all. if the rules of fairness and justice were
observed there would be no difficulty in manning the navy.
With regard to the officers, if the discontent which was said
to exist really did prevail, the sooner the Admiralty set to
work to ameliorate their condition the better.
Sir F. T. BARING would not enter upon the numerous
topics which had occupied the attention of the last two
speakers, but would address himself to the actual question
before the house. The motion of the right hon. gentleman
was for an inquiry upon two grounds. The first, which
stood at the head of the motion, was for a commission to
consider the present system of promotion and retirement,
and the pay and position of the officers. Tho second branch
of the inquiry stood upon a different footing, and he would
first take that question which in the course of his official
career claimed much of his attention—namely, retirement
from the service. Now, upon what ground did the right
hon. gentleman ask for an inquiry into the subject of re-
tirement ? He must regard this as much too serious a
matter to be dealt with as a party question—(hear, hear)—
and he confessed he was struck with the want of any good
ground for the appointment of a commission for taking the
retirement of officers out of the hands of the Admiralty, and
vesting it in an independent authority. Was any great
evil shown to exist in regard to the present state of promo-
tion and retirement ? When he (Sir F. Baring) was at the
Admiralty the list of admirals was filled with officers in-
capable of going to sea, and who by their age were, however
gallant their services had been, unfit to command in time
of war. It was admitted that this was no longer the case,
and this was an important improvement. When he came
into office it was his duty to look out for an admiral for
some service that was required. After doing his best he was
obliged to choose an officer who was above seventy years of
age. If war had broken out at that time there would only
have been two admirals under sixty who could have been
sent to sea. (Hear.) He earned a great deal of unpopularity
by the measures he undertook, but he had the consolation
of feeling that, if a war now broke out, and it was necessary
for the Admiralty to look out for an admiral there would be
plenty of admirals young and active enough to bo able to
do their duty and serve their country efficiently. The cap-
tains' list was also similarly encumbered. An officer was,
however, no longer obliged to servo thirteen years as a cap-
tain, and the captains' list was now similarly supplied with
young and efficient officers. With regard to commanders
and lieutenants, a fixed number for each rank was estab-
lished. It must be admitted that until the specified number
was reached promotion was slow, to a certain degree. If
the right hon. gentleman, however, fairly compared the
promotion of ten years under the new system with the pro-
motion of ten years when there was no limit, he would
find that the promotion of captains and commanders was
much more rapid now than in the old times. Promotion
was then made out of 3,000 names, while it was now made
out of 1,000, so that the chance of promotion was much
better than it used to be. After a considerable struggle
things had just been brought to this condition—that the
list had been brought down to a proper number, and for the
future every vacancy wokld be filled up. Promotion would
consequently be more rapid than it had ever been before ;
and at such a moment nothing could be more impolitic than
to institute an inquiry. He was therefore not inclined to
support the motion for a commission, the effect of which
would be to raise expectations of a great change in the
system of retirement. What happened at the close of the
last war ? Such a mass of promotions Was then poured upon
the officers in the navy that the service had suffered ever
since. He hoped the house would take warning by that
example, and not allow their feelings of generosity to carry
them too far. The right hon. Bart. the member for Droit-
wich had alluded to bis plan of promotion and retirement.
Why, the right hon. gentleman had put forth three sepa-
rate Sehottit:!, and the house ought to be informed which of
them received the approval of the late limed of Admiralty.
It was rumoured that the plans of the right hon. gentleman,
however acceptable to the navy, did not afford rnech satis-
faction to his own colleagues in the Admiralty; but, Whe-
ther that WOS SO or not, the right hon. gentleman was bound
to sheer, on moving for a commission of inquiry, that
there existed some evil which required a remedy. The
house was asked to authorize an inquiry into the pay and
position of all the officers in the navy. That was a Vet"
formidable task to undertake. The Wellington Commis-
sion of 1840 had been cited as a precedent. Circtim-
stances had changed since 1840 ; but the 'Wellington
Coratnistion was not very fortunate in its recommenda-
tions, because when he went to the Admiralty in 1849 he
found the state of the Navy List as bad as it could be. Ito
objected to intrust to a commission a duty which properly
belonged to the government. A commission was a very
expensive luxury ; it was not responsible either to
Parliament or the country, whereas the Government were
bound not only to inquire into the grievances which might
exist in the naval service, but to carry into effect whatever
measures of redress might be necessary. Ho opposed the
motion, Moteosier, because, if carried, it would produce un-
comfortable feelings in the navy and excite hopes which
could never be realised. There was not a finer service in the
world than the English navy; but among its other privi-
leges, it enjoyed that of grumbling at its supposed griev-
ances) and he was no't astonished that the right hon. baro-
net the member for Droitwich had received letters from so
many officers detailing cases of hardship and injustice.
With regard to the old mates, he heard with great pleasure
the statement of the noble lord that their case was under
the consideration of the Admiralty. In like manner he
wished all the other cases which had been mentioned to be
inquired into ; but let the inquiry be conducted by the Ad-
miralty. He did not desire to see the Admiralty relieved
from responsibility by the appointment of a commission.
Mr. COCHRANE observed that the right hon. baronet
had said a great deal on the question of retirement, but had
touched very little Upon the other subject involved in the
motion,—the pay and position of the officers. He believed
the noble lord was most anxious to serve the navy, and if
he did not do all that was desired, it was because he was
trammelled by office. The noble lord had made a compari-
son between the navy and the army, but it must be admit-
taeddvathuatatgthqetr, navy
was not treated with the same liberality
as the army. The old officers in the army had an immense
appointments to colonelcies, but nothing pi-
milar • tri that was given to old admirals, and, taking the
post's of governors in different parts of the world, very few
'were held by naval men, and a great many were held by
military men. There were other instances in which the
navy was not treated with the same generosity as the army,
and with respect to officers commanding ships he could
bear testimony to the accuracy of the observation that they
were put to great expense by their appointment. He trusted
that the motion for the commission would be carried.
Mr. LINDSAY conceived the proposed inquiry to be ne-
cessary. On referring to the active list in 1859 it would be
ifno
tt
om
the
et that
ft
servicei
no out
iormfy, P 9 admirals only 14 were employed, out
wofor3tsh7ycaptains only 97 were employed, and out of 504 com-
manders only 173 were employed. This wawa matter well
nfoirntaheetivecoulinfetruny
unless
sd
thneoreriwtt
stooniberfia7
chance of employyne.nt for them. Let there be an inquiry,
therefore, for the purpose of seeing if the supply could
not be brought re tore in accordance with the demand. It