The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-13 00:00:00

CONFIRMATION AND PROBATE ACT (1858)

AMENDMENT BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
CONSOLIDATED FUND APPROPRIATION BILL
—ALLEGED ILLEGAL INTERFERENCE OF
THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Sir B. HALL asked the First Lord of the Admi-
ralty whether he would have any objection to state
to the house the reasons which had led to the dismissal
or the retirement of Captain Carnegie from the office of
one of the Lords of the Admiralty ; and whether Admiral
Sir Richard Dundas also tendered his resignation, and
had since been induced to remain at the Board ; and also
asked for the name or names of the officers appointed to
fill the vacancy or vacancies ? It would be remem-
bered that he had moved for the appointment of
a committee to inquire into the conduct of the
Board of Admiralty with reference to interference in the re-
barn of members to that house, and that committee had made
as the house was aware, a report on the subject
condemnatory of the Board of Admiralty. With reference
to his motion a report was current to the effect that Sir R.
Dundas had been sent for by the First Lord of the Admiralty,
and was ordered by him to stand for the borough of
Dover. Having declined to comply with this instruction,
and resigned his situation as one of the Lords of the Admi-
ralty, Captain Carnegie was then sent for, and a similar
offer was made to him, and he put hinislf into com-
munication with a confidential adviser, and received a
report from him respecting his chances of being returned
for Dover. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Bernal Osborne.) That
confidential adviser told him he had not a chance for the bo-
rough. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Osborne.) He had another
interview with the First Lord of the Admiralty, and then
he felt called on to resign his office at the board, stating
that he could not consistently with his feelings retain his
position. (Hear, hear.) He received a telegraphic
communication rom• the gallant gentlepian, who
,
objected to the word in his motion of dismissal," and
had stated that he had resigned. (Hear, hear.) He also
added that he knew he could not be returned, and, there-
fore, did not consider that he was called on to stand for the
borough. Sir William Holt was then sent for, and having
declined to stand for Dover, he was not appointed to the
vacant office at the board ; for however valuable the ser-
vices of the gallant gentleman were he was not accepted,
because he did not do the official bidding of the First Lord
of the Admiralty. .Admiral Mundy was next sent for, and
his services were dispensed with for the same reasons. Sir
Thomas Herbert was then sent for, and was despatched to
another borough, but whether he was a Lord of the Ad-
miralty or not he could not say. Sir Henry Leeke was next
summoned, and was sent to Devonport, and being a large
contractor, he was a very proper person no doubt to be sent.
That gentleman did not receive support from the dock-
yards, the men employed there having-strongly disapproved
of the intention of the Government bill to disfranchise
them. Sir Henry Leeke then issued a communication ad-
dressed to the outfitters of Devonport, in which he pro-
mised them a portion of the advantages of the cadets, and
other perquisites at present monopolised by Portsmouth.
Notwithstanding, however, he was unsuccessful, and be was
then sent to Dover. Admiral Martin either tendered his
resignation, or intended to have done so. He, however

was retained, and Captain Carnegie's services' were dis-
pensed*with. The latter gentleman was one of the ablest
officers connected with the navy ; besides, he was in the
prime of life; and he was replaced by a man of more than
70 years of age. They were on the eve of a war, and instead
of sending members of the Board of Admiralty from place to
place to obtain seats in Parliament they should be directed to
devote the whole of their energies to a supervision of the
dockyards, so as to place their naval force in a state of effi-
ciency to meet any crisis that might arise. (Hair, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON—I must, in the first place, sir, ex-
press a very great doubt whether a question such as that
which the righthon. baronet has nowput to me is onewhich
ought in strict propriety to be put in this house. (Oh, oh,
and Hear, hear.) The very form in which he has shaped
the question shows that he entertained some doubt as to its
propriety. He says he will ask "whether I will have any
objection to state." Now, sir, we all know that in the for-
mation of Governments and in the conduct of Governments
personal arrangements and communications take place be-
tween the gentlemen of whom these Governments consist ;
communications perfectly fair and honourable in themselves,
but which are not intended to be, and ought not to be, sub-
mitted to public question and answer in this house. (Hear.)
Having thus guarded myself against admitting the pro-
priety of the question, I beg distinctly to say, that as far as
I am concerned in this case, I have no objection to answer
the question ; but on the contrary, I am very glad the right
hon. baronet has afforded me an opportunity of doing so.
Sir, before answering the inquiry which has been addressed
to me, I think it right to remind the house that for a very
long period all successive administrations have felt it to be,
not their interest merely—for it rests upon higher grounds
—but their duty, to endeavour that some of the naval mem-
bers of the Board of Admiralty should occupy seats in the
House of Commous—(hear, hear, from the Ministerial
benches)—in order that they might be able to touch upon
those professional subjects, and to answer those professional
inquiries which we all know are frequently brought under
public attention. Sir, I have looked back as far as the year
1819, and.l have found that from that year there has not
been one Board of Admiralty previous to the present which
has not bad some naval lords occupying seats in this house;
there has always been one, sometimes two, and frequently
three. Lord Melville had in some years only one, but for
many years he had two. In 1830 Sir James Grail= had
two naval lords in the house, in 1834 Lord Auckland had
three. Lord Minto had sometimes two and sometimes three;
he had three in 1837 and in 1841. Lord Haddington had in
1841 two, and in 1843 three naval lords in the house. Lord
Ellenborough in 1846 had three ; Lord Auckland in 1846
had two, and in 1847 three. Sir Francis Baring in 1849 had
three, and in 1850 two. The Duke of Northumberland in
1852 had two ; Sir James Graham in 1863, and throughout
the remainder of his administration, had one. From 1855
to 1857 Sir Charles Wood had one naval lord here, Sir M.
Berkeley. When Parliament was dissolved, on the advice
of the noble viscount opposite, in 1857, Sir M. Berkeley lost
his seat for Gloucester; and the short period that intervened
between the last general election and the month of Fob-
ruary last year was the first time during 40 years that any
Board of Admiralty was without a naval lord sitting in
this house. (Hear, hear.) Sir, when the present Govern-
ment was constituted, at the end of February, 1858, I felt,
as all previous First Lords of the Admiralty had no doubt
felt, that it was most desirable that some naval member of
the board should have a seat in this house. I requested an
hon. and gallant friend of mine, who was a member of this
house, to accept a seat at the Board of Admiralty. Much
to my regret my proposal was declined. I then constituted
the Board of Admiralty in a manner the general efficiency
of which has been acknowledged ; but which has always
been subject to the serious disadvantage that not one of the
naval lords has had a seat in this house. (Hear.) The house
cannot have forgotten to what an unusual extent our atten-
tion was occupied during the blast session, and has been
occupied up to the present time during the present session,
by discussions on naval subjects; and notwithstanding the
great and well-known competency of my hon. friend the Se-
cretary of the Admiralty, I have felt, and felt very painfully,
the great disadvantage—l say again, not a party or a per-
sonal disadvantage, but a disadvantage connected with the
highest interests of the public service—l say I have painfully
felt this disadvantage when I have had to contend in argu-
ment with such men as my noble and gallant friend the mem-
for Sandwich, and the gallant admiral the member for
Southwark. As a civilian, I have felt the disadvantage of
not having that professiodal assistance on these subjects of
which every one of my predecessors for 40 years had the
benefit. (Cheers.) Sir, under these circumstances it was my
wish, and it was my intention, with the full concurrence of
my colleagues, to avail myself of the first opportunity which
might arise to endeavour to supply this serious deficiency.
The first opportunity arose a few weeks ago, when a vacancy
occurred at the Board of Admiralty in consequence of my
appointing Captain Drummond to the command atWoolwi ch.
Having a vacant seat to fill up on that occasion, I sent for
Captain Carnegie, and in a persoral interview I requested
him to accept the vacant office ; but I told Capt. Carnegie
at the time the serious disadvantage to which I found my
board exposed by having none of its naval members in this
house, and I asked Capt. Carnegie fairly and openly whether
he would accept the vacant seat, with a clear and distinct
understanding that he was willing to enter the House of
Commons whenever he might be required so to do by the
Government, for any fairly eligible seat. (Laughter.) Capt.
Carnegie required eight-and-forty hours to consider this
proposal. So far as I remember the proposal was made in a
conversation on Saturday. Everything that passed between
us was verbal. Nothing was taken down in writing, and I
am very sorry for it. He requested till Monday, I think, to
give me an answer. On Monday he came to me again, and
told me that he had considered my proposal, and the condi-
tion with which it was accompanied, and that he should be
happy to accept the offer. (Ministerial cheers.) On that oc-
casion, wishing that there might be no misunderstanding, I
repeated to Capt. Carnegie in plain terms what was the
condition, observing that the public service required that
there should, if possible, be a naval member of the board
in the House of Commons, and I asked him whether he
was willing to accept that condition. Capt. Carnegie again
clearly understood it, and accepted the office with that con-
dition. Accordingly, Captain Carnegie joined the board.
Nothing more passea on this subject until the Government
had decided to advise the dissolution of the present parlia-
ment. I, as a matter of course—and I don't think the right
hon. gentleman (Sir B. Hall) can blame me for so doing—
then reminded Captain Carnegie of the understanding into
which he had entered ; and, so far as I can recollect, I men-
tioned to him three—there were certainly two, and I think
three—seats which, so far as I could judge,. presented a
very fair chance of success, and which, I said, he wouldo
oblige the Government by contesting. Sir, to my :I•Pr!osn
Captain Carnegie showed on that occasion ah. Ilan
itdteittng
showed
dcoulnodt noonityunhdesersitatltinodn.
butOn thveactiwiloog;
end of three days he made
hwehischhowl
and
it known that he did not
that on mtimatin
dsg resignation, and
this intention, Capt. Carnegie offered to fulfil the conditions on which he took office. (Hear.) I
think it is hardly necessary for me
to
once
accepted that resignation. (Ministerial
ptf.orcmarneteogiaeddontntahat It at
occasion
means at compensation for
cheers.) But, sir,
tohnidnktnimit is still
ll.yesslnteoeldesscaray
pio,-en mbyenliom. to which he had entered.
that his resigna coin the last momen at the eleventh
d cheers.) row, sir, I will' not undertake (Renewemhosurbrms
impute to a
any-
thing so painful as togentleman of Captain
Carnegie', high social an professional standing, that he
deliberately and intentionally violated an honourable un-
derstanding ; .there may be some explanation of the cir-
cumstances which is satisfactory to his mind ; but, air,
I am bound to say this, that I am unable to reconcile
the course which Captain Carnegie took with the hon-
ourable engagemeet into which he had entered with
myself. (Cheers.) Sir, the right hon. gentleman in the
course of his reference to Captain Carnegie proceeded bb
advert to circumstances which I confess seem to me to hal*
very little to do with the questions which he put to me. He
referred to rumours that I 'had offered the seat which wM

vacant to Sir Williamlioste,andaiterwards to Admiral
Mundy. I pass over this part of what fell from the right
hon. gentleman with this simple statement, that a seat At
the Board of Admiralty being vacant it was absolutely-ne-
cessary to fill it. I certainly did very much wish, for
reasons which I have already mentioned, that the gentle-
man who undertook to fill the office should also consent tr.
come into Parliament ; but whether or not one office-
another did accept that seat or did see reason to re"
is a matter which I really think neither the right
tleman nor the house has any right to inquire
Ministerial cheers.) Well, sir, I have thr
exact circumstances connected with Capt
now, with the permission of the how
planation with regard to Sir Ricl-
as the dissolution of the prase--
upon, I had a conversation
pointed
out to him the
already referred as P-
in consequence of
in the Rouse o
three seats
to enter
be ()le'

or

.use it,
.ion. gen -
.nto. (Loud
.s explained the
Carnegie. 1-
_4B, give a similar ea-
-arc! Drindas. As soon
-it Parliament was decided
with Sir Richard Dundas.
disadvantage to which I have
.essing on the Board of Admiralty
no one of its naval raelnbere being
Commons. I mentioned to himi two or
sderlikAerz, t
.or Which I thought, if he were clisDosed
need, ahirsreegtztteliCoraLnons,to lieconewa

the next four-and-twenty hours whether he could cr
could not comply with the suggestion which I had made.
Sir, the next day Sir Richard Dundas came back to me, and
the language which he held to me---
and I must remark that
it was not the first time that he held that language, he held
similar language to me on a simil•o c
Dungan
ionse
ed waa hn
vuseralmontthsi
ago—the language Which Sir Richard
—that on reflection he was not willing to endeavour to enter
parliament for either of the seats which
distinctly the public I had mentioned to
him, but ho recognised broadly and
necessity which existed for one o r more of the naval members
of the Board of Admiralty having a seat in the house. In-
deed, he said more -, he said he felt that he had no right to
decline to be in the Hon: ofity
Commons, and to stand m the
way of meeting the necessity which he distinctly admitted ;
that we ought to have naval members of the board in this
house, and that he begged I would not allow. any feelings
for him to prevent my filling up the board with naval offi-
cers who would comeinto parliament ; and that rather than
cause any embarrassment or any difficulty to the Govern-
meplace his seat entirely at my disposal.
it, he would
(Hear, hear.)_,
Well, so strongly did I feel the public ne-
cessity of having a naval member of the board in this house
that although I arrived at the conclusion that I did with
very great regret on personal grounds, yet it was my inten-
tion to avail myself of the offer made in so handsome a manner
by Sir Richard Dundas, and to accept his resignation, with a
view of putting some other person in his place. (Cheers from
the Opposition.) Well, sir, a few days ago, circumstances
of a public nature, into which I de not feel at liberty to en-
ter, which were wholly unconnected with anything like party
politics, wholly unconnected with election matters, circum-
stances I say occurred within the last few days which mad e me
feel very strongly that it was not desirable at that moment for
the board to lose the services of so distinguished an officer
as Sir Richard Dundas. (Hear, hear.) I repeat that these
circumstances had nothing to do with_party politics, and had
nothing to do with electioneering. I submitted these views
to Sir Richard Dundas, and expressed to him my wish not
to avail myself of the offer he had made, but to retain his
services at the board. (Hear, hear.) To that representation
Sir Richard Dundas acceded, and he does remain at the naval
board. (Cheers.) With reference to Sir Richard Dundas, I
only wish to add—and I add it because it is due to my own
feelings to do so—that throughout these communications the
conduct of Sir Richard Dundas was marked by that zeal for the public service, and by that high sense of personal
honour, which always have distinguished, and which I am
sure always will distinguish that gallant officer—(cheers)
—and I beg to add, further, that these communications did
not interrupt for one single moment the friendly feeling
with which I have had the pleasure of acting with Sir R.
Dundas from the time when I first became connected with
him at the Admiralty. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman
asked me whether the vacancy caused by the resignation of
Capt. Carnegie is filled, and if so, by whom. Sir, seat is
filled by Rear-Admiral Sir Henry Leeke. Theright hon.
gentleman has brought forward what he seems to consider a
very serious charge against Sir Henry Leeke. Indeed, he
appears to consider it a charge against me, and he
so on Saturday last. The charge is that Sir Hen told me
ry Leeke
told the electors of Devonport
that ifha he were returned
that place would have a share in the cadets and the per-
quisites now monopolised by Portsmouth. Now, in the
first place, I do not understand what is meant by this mo-
nopoly of the cadets and the perquisites. The "monopoly
of cadets" is absolute nonsense ; and as to perquisites, I
do not in the least know what the perquisites are. But,
sir, it is a paint for me to consider—and this is a point on
which I beg to give a broad, plain, distinct answer to the
right hon. gentleman—that up to the present moment I
have not had one word of communication. with Sir H.
Leeke of any sort whatever. If Sir Henry Leeke promised
cadetships which clearly he could not give, or promised
perquisites which, so far as I know, have no existence, all I can say is, that such langguage was not authorised by me
directly or indirectly. If Sir Henry Leeke has made
any
promises at Devonport of any sort whatever, I assure the
house, upon my honour, that I have had nothing to do
with them. (Hear, hear.) Now, the next statement of
the right hon. gentleman was that Sir Henry Leeke, find-
ing that he did not get on well at Devonport, had reported
himself to the First Lord and then gone on to Dover. Now
here again I beg to say that the right hon. gentleman is
entirely misinformed. It does appear that Sir Henry
Leeke has left Devonport and
but I gone to Dover;
know no more why he did so, or when
he did so, than the right hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.)
I did not know that he had done so until I heard lately,
ta
aught Yer. surprise, that he was at Dover, (Opposition
,
i I assure the right hon. gentleman and the
house that in transitu from Devonport to Dover Sir
Henry Leeke did not report himself to the First Lord.
(I-rear, hear.) Sir, I now beg to refer to a statement which
the right hon.
un gentleman has not inclueed in his question,
but Which e_ _
s been circulated elsewhere. It has been
stated that not only did I request Captain Carnegie and Sir
Richard not
to endeavour to obtain seats in Parlia-
ment, and threaten them with expulsion from the board if
they did dot comply, but I made a similar request, and
uttered a threat, to a third member of the board. (No, from
Sir B. Hall.) I did not say that the right hon. gentleman
C,hed made that statement, but that it had been made. Now
aw I far attempted compulsion in the cases of Captain
Carnegie and Admiral Dundas I have already explained ;
and I beg to assure the house that there is no truth what-
hev eard er in the rumours with regard to a third member of the
. I had in fact no communication on this subject with
Beee third member of the board, and none beyond what I have
aerearl, Y stated. The right hon. gentleman having alluded
see, ene intended resignation of Admiral Martin, I will
Maw advert to that subject. Sir. it is true that Admiral
elatein expressed an intention to resignhis seat atthe board ;
but it is also true that that intention had nothing what-
ever to do with a seat in Parliament, or with anything con-
nected with a seat in Parliament. (Hear, hear.) His
intention was founded solely on considerations of a personal
nature, into which I do not feel at liberty to enter. It is
sufficient for me to say, that after a conversation which I
had with him Admiral Martin revoked the intention which
he had expressed. Sir, I have now answered the questions
which the right hon. gentleman put to me with regard
to the important matters to which he referred ; I
have done so with entire sincerity, and without any re-
serve; and having given this reply, I beg to add that I feel
that I have done nothing of which I have reason to be
aehamed or which I need have any hesitation in avowing
here or elsewhere in the most public manner. (Loud Mi-
nisterial cheers.)
the DUNCOMBE said, having been alluded to by
l'ue right hon. baronet, he wished to say a few words. It
/raB perfectly true that when the present Government ac-
Ceded to office, the right hon. baronet did him the honour,
if an honour he might call it, to invite him to join the
Board of Admiralty. He said,
." If an honour he might
Boa
it," because, whether intentionally or not, the offer was
made in such a way that he was quite precluded from ac-
cepting it. (Laughter.) If it had been made in such a
manner that he could have accepted it consistently with
What was due to himself, he would have done so. What
were the facts of the case ? In 1852, when he was at the
esi3es°arsd °I Admiralty for a short time, he consented to occupy
.-"' teas usually termed in that house the post of civilian
lord. Between that time and the early part of last year,
when the Government acceded to office, he rose to a higher'
and he felt therefore that he could no
dlantegkerinat
accept service
raviee subordinate place at the board, or serve un-
er a junior officer. It was on that ground, and on that
ground alone, that he declined to accept the offer of his
lable o
right oe. friend, and he should never have breathed a syl-
n the subject if the matter had not been alluded to as
itaellead,heen• As regarded the report of the committee of
liebeeeeladwhieh the right hon. baronet the member for Mary-
referred, he begged to say that what the com-
mittee condemned was not the conduct of the board gene-
rail
A , Y, but that of the then Secretary to the Admiralty, the
ate Mr• 'e Stafford, who himself admitted that in his zeal he
t,3eatPPed beyond the bounds of prudence. Considering that
gentleman was now no more, it was, he thought, to be
regretted that the matter had been referred to. (Hear.)
of Mr. B. n
tim A,
.''SBORNE said, considering that the _First Lord
-r------ralts, had shown such laudable assiduity in en-
esting to deri him of his seat for Dover—(laughter)
e "A)Ped he should be allowed to make a few observations.
Ile must say that it appeared from the explanation which
the h
eau ere ad just heard, that, to adopt the language of the
right hon. bart.
heeb aehownadmincel who had just spoken, the . , eieeee
Q. ore zeal than prudence in meddling with elec-
temeepolle,:taatters. Now this question resolved itself
. into
netted with'
there was the private
.consideration con-
rightattack mad hon. gentleman • e upon Captain Carnegie by the
sideratimi a how 1 , and next, there was the public con-
main constitutedo the Board of Admiralty was to re-
Vete attack,
although gonet was then. With regard to the pri-
Capt. Carnegie he had but a slight acquaintance with
know that whaleneee had sufficient acquaintance with him to
prepared to do. The'hat gallant officer undertook he was
house that he offered Capt C ri ht the
gentleman having told
seats," was, he thought
u aPt. Carnegie three " fairly eligible
and to name the 11; , bound to continue his narrative,
" fairly eligible " (oee Seats which, in his opinion, were
the First Lord of the rdosition cheers.) Now he put it to
negie coiasenthd tO take miralty whether when Capt. Car-
which was thought fairly 1118
place at the board, the seat
before his eyes, wasnot
Bard to which there had bee ugh
and which was dangled
borough of Midhurst with re-
(Hear, hear.) Moreover he some discussion in that house ?
tleman what reason he had to
,e would ask the right hon. gen-
.,
.Government leereagh e suppose that Dover was a
• himself answeethat (Laughter.) Perhaps he could
had lately givtii
the question. The right hon. gentleman
Dover to the brother rintment of inspector of packets at
ma,.11, electioneering agent in that town.
Having forced. tapt.
post to a waine to retire he had given his
thatgentletaan,nearaed Truscott ; and, perhaps it was
for this reason
eligible." a thought a seat at Dever was "fairly
Sir J. PAKlNGTONbewihisshedto correct the hon. gentle-
man. Whoever Miht
he forced Capt. IVVlglwaine to retire, He was promoted (as authority, it was not true that
was understood),
Mr. B. OSBORNE said Catpain'iii:l'llevaine never ap-
plied for promotion, nor did he wis - otn the contrary, as
he was informed, he remonstrated agai' the change. He
would leave Captain Carnegie th settle difference with
the right hon. gentleman, but he must say that that was
in a First Lord such
the first time that they had heard fro
ti
of political jobbing at th
hear),—.a/lekaftarer those revelations it il
aMs Admiralty
—(hear,
asany
itinvsturase P.- went could allow the Admiralty to remain
kuPPesition cheers.) On the eve of a war--the
right hon. ge,. darkly alluded to that subject—at
time when then}l7—.ernment had just proclaimed the neces-
sity of recoils
trutheetinArtshe navy and strengthening the
' Channel fleet—
Lord of the Admiralty was so
forgetful of the state of things to dispense with the sereialgs he Europe that he was ready
contest member of his board —A dmiral Dundas, or of anyy
contest a seat in that house. who did not choose to go and
nwothatever might be the feel-
ing there, the country would
remain constituted as it was at
tkaa affected Permit the A:dmiralty to
the right hon. gentleman . present. (Cheers.) Now,
was the meaning of the telegram , --ee leet, to know what
meant by a
Devonport with regard to the prornises—ce fled come from
Leeks. He had affected not to knew „tattle by Sir Henry
monopoly of cadets, which was the less was
regard to
confession that he wanted a. dry niir,ctsiii:ng after his
h
naval lord in that house, to instruct him eiEthalee of a
naval matters. (Oh, oh, from the ministe
Now, it so happened that Sir H. Leeke halo so eneehele•)
at Devonport, who was a contractor for the dnoelre--a-we and he held out to the voters that if they wouhree 0""
cure his return for Devonport he would use - his
influence to induce the First Lord of the Admiralty to have
the naval examinations which are held at Portsmouth, held
exclusively at Devonport. That was the explanation of
what was said with respect to the cadets. As to the quibble
about the term," perquisites," however that house might be
deceived by it, there was, he was sure, no man in Devonport
who did not Well understand what was meant by it. (Cheers.)
It seemed that Sir Henry Leeke had left Devonport and
gone to Dover:.. (Hear, hear.) He thought the hon. and
gallant officer would not thank the right hon. gentleman
for
given him-
.. that roving commission. He must
add that in
having
on the country had some right to corn-
s 2?
plain that Sir
lira opinion
having previously been on the re-
tired list, had been placed on the active list at 70 years of
. Such a proceeding b unexampled. For
age
e was, he believed, hlieved,
what services Was SirinH. Leeke rewarded in that manner ?
Was it for what he had done at Devonport, or for what he
was expected to do at Dover ? (Laughter.) He must say
intention of the n h
that whatever might have been the , g. .
t
liga. 841010;w4 be had ftteiamPtOcl to iwrit. 4911°14ur'gge

motives to Capt. Carnegie. (" No, no," from the ministerial
benches.) The right hon.gentlemanhad not done so directly;
he dealt in insinuation—hinted a fault. Leaving the hon. and
gallant officer to state his difference with the right hon. gen-
tleman he would now declare that he believed here was
scarcely a man in that house or out of it who would put
any confidence in the Board of Admiralty a it was now
constituted, and if the gallant admiral the member for
Southwark would make a motion to inquire in' o the consti-
tion of that boani, be*(ffr. -Osborne), who had always been
opposed to such motions before—(derisive laughter from
the Ministerial benches)—yes, he was opposed to them, be-
cause he believed the First Lords of the Admiralty did not
dirty their hands with jobbery—he would give that motion
his support.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I hope
the house will not allow personal details, which are perhaps
rather amusing, to *divert its attention from a most impor-
tant principle in our parliamentary constitution. Ought the
Board of Admiralty to be professionally represented in the
house or not ? (Hear.) For my own part I think it is due
to the honour and to the infldence of Parliament—and I am
sure it is due to the Executive Government, from whatever
party it may have been formed—that the Board of Admi-
ralty should be professionally represented in this house, as
it has been for a long series of years. I can say from obser-
vation, during the existence of the present Government,
that, notwithstanding all the assiduity and ability of my
right hon. friend (Sir J. Pakington), when questions relat-
ing to the administration and organisation of the navy have
been under discussion, great inconvenience has often arisen
for want of the presence of a naval member of the Board of
Admiralty in this house. There are before us many per-
sons eminent for their professional abilities, connected witn
the naval service, and who are perhaps on account of such
eminence members of this house ' • all the naval measures of
the Government are subject to their criticism ; and as a
Board of Admiralty which is represented only by civilians
cannot cope with such critics, erroneous notions are con-
veyed to the public mind. For more than twelve months
we have suffered for want of a professional representative
of the Admiralty, and I do not think any one can be sur-
prised to find that the Government have taken the ear-
liest opportunity of remedying what they felt to be a
grievance to themselves, and believed to be very injurious
to the public interests. Long before the dissolution of Par-
liament was anticipated, her Majesty's Government bad
this point under their consideration, and even endeavoured
to find some opportunity of supplying the deficiency under
which they have so much suffered. M y right hon. friend the
First Lord of the Admiralty has expressed his regret that
what passed between himself and Captain Carnegie was not
reduced to writing. Believing them both to be men of
honour, I cannot say that I share in that regret—(hear,
hear)—and I believe that when their statements come to be
compared it will be found that there is no great difference
between them. lam bound to say, having the honour of
Captain Carnegie's acquaintance, it is by an accident com-
pletely in my power, if it were necessary, to substantiate the
statement of my right hon. friend. It so happens that soci-
ally, and not in any way connected with my official position,
Captain Carnegie sought a conversation with me. He then
expressed his extreme gratification in returning to public
life, and told me he had accepted office with the distinct
understanding of entering Parliament on the first opportu-
nity ; and he further stated that he looked forward with great
interest to assisting me in the House of Commons, and to
assisting the Board of Admiralty in those particular duties in
which it required aid. (Cheers.) I had much conversation
with Capt. Carnegie on that occasion, and every statement he
made to me completely sanctioned the statement made by my
right hon. friend, a statement which I do not think Captain
Carnegie will question. I have thought it my duty to call
the attention of the house to the very important principles at
stake, that it might not be diverted from them by the lively
comments of the hon. gentleman who still represents Dover.
(Loud laughter.) Ido entreat the house, whatever may
pass as to details on this discussion, I do entreat them not
to be induced by party feeling to sanction the principle that
it is not expedient for the public service that the Admiralty
should be represented professionally here. I do not know
anything which would do more to diminish the influence of
the House of Commons in naval affairs. I hardlyknow what
would have a greater tendency to establish an inefficient
administration than a permanent board of naval officers. I
am quite sure that the efficiency of that administration is
best promoted by those changes which our constitutional
forms promote, and that without those changes the Board
of Admiralty would soon become in its practice much behind
the spirit of the times. Sir, I trust the house will feel on
reflection that my right hon. friend has only done his duty
in endeavouring to place the administration of the Admi-
ralty on its proper basis. (Loud cheers.) I will touch but
slightly on the grievances of the hon. member for Dover
(Mr. B. Osborne). He wanted to know what ground we
have for considering Dover a Government borough. We
have no idea that Dover is a Government borough ; we
know that a Lord of the Admiralty taking his seat there
would take an independent seat. We only think that there
must be some sympathy between a port and a distinguished
naval officer, as we know there have been sympathies before
between Dover and a gentleman who was connected with
the Admiralty. (Laughter and cheers.) Dover may be,
and I believe is, completely independent ; but Dover once
elected a Secretaryl to the Admiralty—(cheers)—and, a for-
tiori, it is not impossible that it might elect a naval Lord
of the Admiralty. (Hear, hear.) I can add that I have
a personal acquaintance with Sir Henry Leeke. I have
always heard that he was a very distinguished man, and I
must say that, having seen him, he did not give me the idea
that he was of the age of 70. One thing must be admitted,
that he showed great activity, for he seems to have been at
Dover and Devonport on the same day. (Laughter and
cheers.) I believe that in so doing Sir H. Leeke is only
modelling his career on that of a more distinguished prede-
cessor. I am informed—perhaps not correctly, but certainly
with as much correctness as has characterised many state-
ments to-night—that the hon. gentleman the present dis-
tinguished member for Dover did at the ' last election first
appear for Devonport. (Laughter and cheers.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE—I was asked to appear, but refused.
(Laughter.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The hon.
member must at least admit that there was some founda-
tion for my statement, which is perhaps more than can be
said for many other statements made in the course of the
present debate. (Cheers.) I will not attempt to say what
may be the fate of the coming contest. I will only say
that if Sir H. Leeke should, in a future Parliament, repre-
sent Dover, I hope that the hon. gentleman will find a seat
elsewhere. (Laughter and cheers.)
Sir G. GREY said the real question was whether the
First Lord of the Admiralty was acting in accordance with
his duty in placing one, two, or three seats before the naval
lords, and insisting upon their sitting for the one or the other
of them. But his reason for rising was to say a word or
two for the gallant officer to whom allusion had been made.
He had known Capt. Carnegie for very many years, and after
the statement made by the right hon. gentleman opposite
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer), that Capt. Carnegie had
acted inconsistently with his engagement, he felt bound to
say that he considered Capt. Carnegie as incapable of such
a course as the right hon. gentleman himself. He had ex-
pected that the right hon. gentleman would have given a
different explanation of the statement made by Sir J. Pak-
ington. He trusted that before this matter dropped the
right hon. gentleman would give some further explanation
in exculpation of Capt. Carnegie.
Sir C. NAPIER wished to know whether Admiral Mar-
tin had left the Admiralty, and what was his reason for so
_ _

Lord C. HAMILTON would make one observation with
reference to what had fallen from the hon. member for Dover
(Mr. B. Osborne) on the subject of Capt. M'llwaine. The
hon. member said that the gallant captain was forced to
give up his post at Dover. It so happened that his militia
regiment was for some time quartered at Dover, and he
then made the acquaintance of Capt. M'llwaine and that
gentleman pressed him again and again, as the greatest
private favour, to write to his right hon. friend the First
Lord of the Admiralty to get him removed from Dover.
(Loud cheers.) He stated that the peculiar softness and
mildness of the climate did not agree with his wife's health
—(hear, hear)—and he (Lord C. Hamiliton) understood
that the gallant gentleman had previously made an appli-
cation to his right hon. friend (Sir J. Pakington) on the
subject. (Cheers.)
Sir E. PERRY (who was received with loud cries of
"oh") said that, in justice to his hon. friend the member for
Dover—(oh, and laughter)—he would say that that which
appeared to be a contradiction in the noble lord was not
really so. (Laughter.) Captain M'llwaine had, as he (Sir
E. Perry) was informed by connexions of his, complained
that, being removed from Dover, he was put on the retired
list. That was the real ground of the gallant gentleman's
complaint. He (Sir E. Perry) would also refer to the man-
ner m which the boroughs to which the right hon. gentle-
men (Sir J. Pakington and Mr. Disraeli) opposite had
alluded were treated. It certainly appeared to him that the
Government had been pressing gentlemen to come forward
for seats in that house, offering them the office of naval lord
as a reward for their success. The house was aware of the
conduct of Lord Derby's Government in 1852—conduct
which he did hesitate to denounce as most flagrant. (Hear,
hear.) There was then an abuse of patronage and power
such as had not been for more than a hundred years before.
The previous Whig Governments had succeeded in putting
a stop to the corruption in the dockyards. (Oh, oh, and
loud laughter.) But all that was altered by the Govern-
ment of Lord Derby. On the present occasion the Govern-
ment seemed to be following a similar course. They found
Sir H. Leeke, a junior lord of the Admiralty, going down
to Devonport, and then stating as a reason for his election
that he would exert himself to• have the Government
patronage removed from Portsmouth to that place. (Hear,
hear.) He must say that the conduct of the First Lord of
the Admiralty resembled more that of the Secretary to the
Treasury or Government whip, than that of the first
Minister for naval affairs.

Colonel NORTH rose to confirm what had been stated
by Lord C. Hamilton with regard to Captain Wllwaine.
The hearsay statements of the last speaker were therefore
at variance with the facts of the case.

Mr. T. S. D UNCOMBE—I do not wish to go into what
takes place within the walls of the Admiralty, but on the
eve of a general election I will say a few words on the sub-
ject before us. I have always thought that the house was
chosen for the purpose of representing the people. But now
we are told that it is necessary that the Board of Admiralty
should be represented, and that there are certain boroughs
in the pocket of the Admiralty for that purpose. It llas been
represented that there should bea naval officer here to assist
the First Lord of the Admiralty ; would it not be a common •
sense view of the question to have a naval officer for the
First Lord of the Admiralty ? You would not then want a
person to assist him. If you are to have a naval officer to
assist, it would be better to have him seated ex officio. Here
you are to represent the people. There is no reason, how-
ever, why there should not be a naval lord. The right hon.
baronet might then go back to the quarter Sessions which
he adorned for so long a time. I am quite sure that he
must know more of magisterial duties than he does of the
navy. These are important times, and we ought to have at
the head of the Admiralty a person conversant with naval
affairs. I am quite sure, if the right hon. baronet does
retire, that England will still remain, as she now is, mistress
of the ocean.
. Sir J. PAKINGTON—Perhaps the house will allow me
a word in explanation with reference to what fell from a
gallant admiral (Duncombe) a short time since. He
referred
lo v,m,y having offered him a seat at the Board of Admiralty.
never so astonished in my life as when I heard him say
as
that offered it on terms which made it impossible for him
to accept it. I can only say I made that offer in terms which
Admiralty
I belie ed
It is to thi
i„ 7 , and certainly meant to be, most friendly. Speak-
,, 17;t?l:re memory, I believe I used the expression that
allude.
b Administration tw
e would resume the seat which he held under the
:tainistration of the Duke of Northumberland."
, _
majustpapkocesee;haiat my hon. and gallant friend must
not aware at the commencement that in that
eiihe held the fifth seat, which is usually occu-
piedalludes to ; 7,,,in. 1 7. this is what my hon. friend
plained the ~, y thought that I had already ex-
had just fallen from hiEi"
Admiral DU.Ne 0-;)nqui-pin'
case. He had at the t* -., in explanation, said that what
right hon. friend correctly stated the
com(tliti,:oint on the subject.
knowledge of the d t time attributed the mistake to want of
e a'l, of the Admiralty, and had there-
fore never made any
inquired when the report onwtall verY
Sir DE L. EVANS
indistinctly heard)
. dockyards, to which re-
qs since, would be placed
Terence had been made some eve
01l thc tgle. He also called attention. to the large number 1

of troops in India, and asked if it was in contemplation to
send out any addition to the artillery there ?
Lord STANLEY was understood te say that the report
in question had been somewhat delayed, but would be laid
on the table before the close of the session. The noble lord
intimated also that it was not intended to send any more
artillery to India.
After some further conversation the bill was read a second
time.

EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
LIEN AND FREIGHT BILL.

The house went into committee in order to pass a resoln-
Uon upon which this bill might be framed.

In committee,

Lord LOVAINE explained that the law was at present
in an unsatisfactory state as to the rights of shipowners.
The object of the bill was to pass a general act which
should give all the powers at present conferred by local acts,
without superseding the latter. It was not intended to pro-
ceed further than prmting the bill during the present session.
The resolution was agreed to, and the house resumed.
ENDOWED SCHOOLS (No. 2) BILL.
The order for the second reading of this bill was then dis-
charged, and the bill withdrawn.