The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-13 00:00:00

manner in which he had expressed himself since he had
filled the office of Secretary to the Admiralty. (Hear.) Of
course he (Sir J. Pakington) spoke with some difficulty on
the present subject, as he had only had a year and a
half's experience of the duties of the First Lord ; but he
agreed in the opinion which had been expressed by the
hon. member (Mr. B. Osborne), that the Comptroller
ought to have a seat at the board, and the Accountant-
General also. (Hear, hear.) Knowing the difficulties of the
business to be transacted by the board, he should be sorry
to see an inquiry sent before a select committee composed
of hon. gentlemen who had had no experienceof the nature
of the duties which came before the board, but he would
suggest that the Government should take upon theniselves
to make the inquiry, and take the same course with reference
to the navy which they had taken with reference to the
army. (Hear, hear.) There should be a well-selected com-
mission to make the requisite inquiry. He could not assent
to some of the statementswhich had been made by the gal-
lant admiral—for instance, that the board only learnt
through the public journals of the launch of a vessel some
days after the occurrence. Now, in his experience, when
at the head of the board, no launch took plane without the
board having the fullest notice. As to shipbuilding he could
state that the surveyor attended at the beard one day in
every week with reference to that subject, and there wasno
shipbuilding of any importance which was not discussed at
the board. As to the iron vessels called rams costing
£600,000 each, he believed the statement would be nearer
correctness if it named £600,000 for two of these vessels.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. LINDSAY said he had made up his mind to vote
for the motion. The -amount of duty to be performed by
the board was so large, and of so varied a character, that
he could not see how it could be performed by any board
constituted as the Board of Admiralty was at present. This
house, and this house alone, was the proper tribunal to in-
quire into the constitution of the Board of Admiralty. He
would not say one word in relation to the charges which
had been brought against the noble lord and the Admiralty,
but he was aware of those charges, having seconded the
motion made by the noble lord. The hon. member did not
particularly name Sir Baldwin Walker, or any particular
person in connection with those charges ; but he expressed a
desire to know how a sum of £5,000,000 had been disposed
of in connection with the administration of the Board of
Admiralty.
Mr. BENTINCK said this question was one of the
greatest importance. The hon. gentleman said he made no
particular charge against the noble lord or any other per-
son in particular of the Board of Admiralty, and in that re-
spect he (Mr. Bentinck) concurred, and so long as a-civilian
was to be kept at the head of that board, he believed they
could not hive a more efficient man in that position than
the noble duke now at the head of the board. But he must
at the same time say, that civilians, in matters
connected with the navy, were mere tyros and
schoolboys. With respect to the gunboats referred to, he
must say that it appeared to him reprehensible to have
allowed them to remain so long without being inspected, i
and if the right hon. bert. was the party who ordered them
to be hauled up the slips, it proved that civilians should not
be selected to serve on the Board of Admiralty. It was said
that they ought not to have the inquiry asked for, inas-
much as there were four different committees sitting at pre-
sent on naval subjects; but that was not sufficient reason
why the inquiry asked for should not take place. With re-
gard to the promotion of officers, it appeared to him that a
naval man would be the best judge of the merits of officers,
and as to who amongst them were the best qualified in their
profession for promotion.' Of the merits of a naval officer,
a civilian could not be a judge; and it unfortunately hap-
pened that he was so much mixed up with Government, and
party, and political interests and influences, that his pro-
motion of officers was not free from suspicion. He certainly
apprehended that thereovas something wrong in the con-
stitution of the board. The great explanatory fact was, that
the prize of the office was too great for the Admiralty to
relinquish, and they could not ask, with any hope of suc-
cess, that the board would give that precious jewel up,
which, like the brightest gem in the British Crown, was
highly valued.
Sir C. NAPIER hoped the motion would be carried. He
would not refer to those civil duties to which his noble and
gallant friend had referred, and which were all rubbish, but
would offer a word or two upon their military duties. Now,
there was a general complaint throughout the navy against
the Admiralty and a general mistrust of it in the country. The
enormous expense of our naval armaments had been com-
plained of, but that had been explained by the necesssity
for building an entire new navy, and of continually adding
to our fleet so as to keep in advance of France and Russia,
both of whom, as was known, had been making enormous
strides of late years. He did not complain of the First
Lord of the Admiralty being always a civilian, but he would
ask how was it possible that the government of such an
enormous machine as the British navy could be properly
conducted when the head of the department was constantly
changing. Sines 1850 we had as First Lords, Sir F. Bar-
ing, Sir C. Wood, Sir J. Graham, the Duke of Northum-
berland, then Sir C. Wood again, then Sir T. Pakington,
and now the Duke of Somerset. How was it possible that
auy regular system could be carried on or any permanent
improvement introduced, whilst not only the chief, but the
other members of the board and the secretary were chang-
ing with every change of Government. It was very rare
for any Lord of the Admiralty to remain when the Govern-
ment went out. And then who were the persons selected
as Lords of the Admiralty. Generally members of that
house, friends of the Ministers, and persons who were
highly connected and commanded political influence, but
who were not necessarily persons possessing any know-
ledge of naval matters, or even men of distinguished abi-
lity. How was it possible that a board so constituted could
curry on the business satisfactorily ? Then the First Lord
—a civilian—had all the patronage and all the appoint-
ments. It was true the house once put a check upon this
by allowing only one promotion to be made for every three
vacancies. That rule was good for the nonce, but the First
Lord had taken these promotions of one in three as part of
his own patronage. He was sorry to say he had heard the
remark that all the appointments since the present First
Lord of the Admiralty ;lame into office had been given to
people who had been in constant command. He would
not mention names, but he might state that there was one
officer who did his duty well in the Burmese war, and who
had been passed over 16 or 17 times, and he had just been
passed over again by an officer senior to himself, but who
had recently had an appointment. He was not the only
one who had been passed over. There were a great many
others whb had not been employed. He did not find fault
with those who had been employed ; they were all good
officers, but how was it possible for the others, who never
stood any chance of hoisting their flag in time of peace,
to be efficient in case war were to break out. There
was another thing he would mention, and that was that
when officers were appointed they received contradictory
orders. The greater part of the business was carried on by
private letters between the first lord and the commander-
in-chief. The noble lord told them to-night that the first
lord could give an order if it was signed by the secretary.
But by Act of Parliament an order, to be legal, must be
signed by two lords and by the secretary. The six lords
met in separate rooms, and each had his separate work to
do, one the shipbuilding, another the victualling, and an-
other the store department, and so on. It was true they
assembled at the board at 12 o'clock. In theory the thing
seemed perfect, but it did not work well in practice. A
Lord of the Admiralty, after doing his business at the board
went down to Somerset-house, where a whole heap of papers
was placed before him. It was impossible for him to read
them, and he signed them as fast as possible, so that in fact
the actual duty was performed by the department. When
he went to the Baltic in command of the Baltic fleet he was
ordered by the Secretary to the Admiralty to go to Wingo
Sound and there await orders. He, however, got another
letter "from the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lord
Clarendon, who being informed that the ice in the Baltic
had broken up, ordered him to place his fleet in a position
that would prevent the possibility of a Russian fleet getting
into the North Sea. The Admiralty orders told him to do
one thing and the Secretary of State's orders told him to
do an opposite thing. He did not hesitate, because the Se
cretary of State's orders agreed with his own intention. lie
proceeded up the Sound, and got up to Copenhagen, and it
was well he did so. If he had followed the Admiralty orders
the northern confederacy would, there was no doubt, have
been established. He got a letter from the Secretary of
the Admiralty, calling his attention to the orders for him
to remain at Wingo Sound for further orders,
and asking for an explanation of his not having done
so. The next packet brought him a letter from the First
Lord of the Admiralty. It was on public affairs, and he
supposed he might read it. No, he would not read it.
(A laugh.) His answer to the Admiralty was that the orders
of the Secretary of State superseded their lordships' order.
Besides the confusion in the giving of orders there were
other things that were wrong. The Admiralty had never,
since the peace, adopted any means of scanning the navy.
A commission was appointed for the purpose, but the Ad-
miralty had never carried the recommendation of the com-
mittee into effect, and the navy was no more manned now
than it was when he brought forward the motion. Then,
there was the management of Greenwich Hospital. Hon.
members who read the account of the manner in which
Greenwich Hospital was managed, would be astonished and
thunderstruck. Greenwich Hospital was es ablished for the
benefit of seamen of the royal navy, and their widows and
orphans, but the widows and orphans had never ha'l any
attention paid to them. Then the state of the discipline of
the navy was very unsatisfactory. lie would improve the
constitution of the Board by making the First Lord a vice-
admiral of Great Britain, and he should be styled Minister
of Marine. If his plans were carried out there would be
great improvements in the navy, and all the evils which I
existed would be corrected. As to the Controller of the
Navy, his duties were such that he had nothing whatever
to do with the management of the timber, and he knew no
more than he (Sir C. Napier) did of the quantity of timber
in store. As to the statement which had been made by the
Secretary of the Admiralty against Sir B. Walker, he would
say no more than this—that Sir B. Walker had gone into
the whole of it, and had proved clearly that the whole of the
money voted had been accounted for. Still the stain of tho
statement remained, for it bad not been removed. The next
question brought forward was the affair of the gunboats.
or
The hon. gentleman the member for Norfolk had stated that
the maskinery for hauling
p the gun
andbothates
wwhasoleorwdasereddobl
the late First Lorde