The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-29 00:00:00

went in their feelings, the great improvement in the
tone of society there, was appreciated by the Govern-
ment and the people of England, and that the state-
ments we used to hear were no longer credited as cha-
racterising what actually occurred in that country.
(Hear.) The motion of the hon. and learned gentleman
had had this advantage, that it had introduced to the
House of Commons in this the first session of the new

Parliament a subject of great importance in a way which
would probably give an improved tone to our relations
with the Brazils.. That object having been obtained, he
would urge upon the bon. and learned gentleman not to
press his motion to a division, especially as it appeared
to him far too strongly worded for the occasion or for
the position in which the country stood in respect to its
diplomatic relations. If the hon. and learned gentleman
would rest satisfied with having elicited from a large

majority of the house the expression of a general feeling
that the conduct of the Brazilian Government and the

Brazilian people was appreciated by the British Parlia-
ment, and that our Government ought to extend to them
feelings of union, he would have achieved a great result.
He trusted he would be contented with that, and not
ask the house to come to a division which would not con-
vey an accurate idea of the sentiments of the house on
the subject. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said—l should not have ad-
dressed the house but for one observation of the right
hon. gentleman opposite, which I think is calculated to
create a false impression. The right hon. gentleman the
(member for Buckinghamshire said that the instructions
which were given by my noble friend had proved un-
availing, that the slave trade had increased, and that
no check was given to it by the vigilance of our
cruisers, and that the Brazilians themselves undertook
the management of the question and put an end to
the slave trade. If that is a correct representation,
the consequence would be that the Brazilians having
performed the duty of suppressing the slave trade
themselves, it would be only right in us to repeal the
Act of Parliament which has been passed for the regu-
lation of this question. But I maintain that that is nut
a correct representation of the state of things. My re-
collection of them is that our own efforts, active as
they were, did not have any material effect, and the
Brazilian slave trade continued ; but the orders subse-
quently issued to our cruis-ra, not to confine themselves
to the sea-coast, but to go into the inland waters of
Brazil and take slavers found there, were productive of
such an effect that the Brazilians themselves passed an
act to put an end to the slave trade, which had then be-
come such a losing concern that many slave-dealers who
bad before made large fortunes found the losses so great
that they could no longer continue the trade. I believe
that to be the right state of the facts ; and believing that,
lam desirous to leave the question in the hands of
my noble friend and the Government, as indeed I
think most matters relating to the conduct of our fo-
reign affairs should be left ; but I believe that in this
case the success of the course pursued by the Govern-
ment has been so great, tnat it is peculiarly a case for
abstaining from interference by ti.e appointment of a
committee of this house. I fthe hon. and learned gentleman
could suggest anything with regard to the suppression of
the slave trade to Cuba, I do not believe the government
would be so afraid of the powerful monarchy of Spam
—(a laugh)—as not to interfere. I hope the next
time the hon. and learned gentleman touches on this
question, his motion may refer to Cuba, with a view to
he suppressicn of the slave trade there.
The house divided.
For the motion
Against it
THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY.

Sir C. NAPIER rose to move for a select committee
,o inquire into the constitution of thelßoard of Admiralty,
with the view of rendering it more efficient, and better
adapted to the various duties it has to perform. He
said he should be thought imprudent, and perhaps un-
wise to ask for a committee to inquire into the constitu-
tion cf the Board of Admiralty, for in the house they
had not only the present First Lord and Secretary and
most of the members of the past board, but sevetal ex-
first lords, and six or seven ex-naval and civil lords ;
still he thought it his duty to endeavour to persuade
the house to grant him a committee. It was not only
he himself who thought the navy ill-conducted, but
there was hardly a naval officer or a commander-in-chief,
or officer commanding Ili dockyards, who was not of
the seine opinion ; and besides, in the Admiralty itself
he believed that if the clerks at Whitehall and Somerset.
house were polled they would agre in that opinion.
It was necessary to point out the nature of the
Board of Admiralty. Looking back, he found that
in the time of Edward Vl.—(laughter)—the navy
was governed by a high commisdoner, a surveyor,
and a clerk of the acts, and this continued
till James 11. declared himself Lord High Admiral,
and it was during this period that the well-
known Pepys was in office. William 111. ruled the navy
by a board ' • and when Anne came to the throne Prince
George of Denmark was made Lord High Admiral.
The administration of the navy after that continuedro
be carried on by commission until 1832, when the Duke
of Clarence was created Lord High Admiral. At the
time that the Duke of Clarence. became Lord High Ad-
miral the navy had been ruled for 17 or 18 years by Lord
Melville, and during that time nothing had been done
to advance its interests ; no attempt had been made to
do away with the manning iif the navy by impressment.
He remembered that in 1815 a cornet of dragoons was
one of the civil lords of the Admiralty, and Sir G. Cock-
burn, who was then at the Admiralty when this case of
the cornet of dragoons was complained of, stated to the
house that the First Lord had so little time to attend to
the dudes connected with the navy that he was obliged
to leave them to be done by the senior naval lord. This
state of things continued until after the passing of the
Reform Bill, when Sir J. Graham was appointed First
Lord of the Admiralty. At that time Sir J. Pechell, an
excellent officer, was appointed a member of the board.
He (Sir C. Napier) would read an extract from a letter
which he addressed to Sir J. Pechell. [Tile hoc. and
gallant gentleman than read in a very low voice the ex-
tract in question, in which as far as we could ascertain
he sketched a plan fir the administration of the Ad- 1
miralty, which would place greater responsibility on each
head of the departments.] Shealy after this Sir J.
Graham came into office, and introduced a bill to make '
a change in the canstitution of the Board of Admiralty,
and it was found to be somewhat such as he (Sir C.
Napier) had suggested ; but it did not go sufficiently far.
The Beard of Admiralty as constituted now was com-
posed of a firet lord, four naval lords, and one civil Ford.
The intention of Sir J. Graham was that the civil lord
should live at Somerset-house, and take charge of the du-
ties connected with the Accountant-General, that one naval
rl should take charge of the medical and victualling de-
partments, and another of the dockyards. However,
he would read a description of the duties performed by
the Board of Admiralty, taken from the evidence of Sir
F. Baring, then First Lord of the Admiralty, before a com-
mittee of the house. (The hon. and gallant member then
read an extract from the evidence in question, which we
understood to explain in detail the duties of each branch
of the officers of the Admiralty, with the composition of
the board.] By this it appeared that the board had very
arduous duties to perform ; but he could tell the house
that ail the lords worked in different rooms, and each
wrote his orders in the name of the board, and the con-
sequence was that all sorts of contradictory orders were
sent out by the Admiralty, many of which he had him-
self received. He would state the opinion of Sir G.
Cockburn, who had been 18 years at the Admiralty,
under both the old and the new system. [The hon. and
gallant gentleman then read the opinion of Sir G. Cock-
burn, to the effect that the establishment of the Admi-
ralty was most unsatisfactory ; that it was a most incon-
venient and inconsistent practice for one member of the
board, without communicating with his colleagues, to
issue orders in the name of the board ; there was, there-
fore, no real responsibility.] And again, as regarded
the proceedings of the board when united for busi-
ness, it was absurd for a person to preside who did
not understand anything of the profession. The board
consisted of six members, most of whom were selected
because they had seats in Parliament, or parliamen-
tary influence. He (Sir C. Napier) thought it was
wrong in Sir G. Cockburn holding these opinions not to
bring forward a measure for the reform of the Admiralty,
but at his death he left this opinion as a legacy. It
was said that the Board of Admiralty was a responsible
body, but he could show ont of the mouth of a first
lord of the Admiralty what that respon-ibility was. Be-
fore the Sebastopol committee Sir James Graham said
that he went to Earl Spencer who had long been a first
lord of the Admiralty to consult him how to carry on the
war, and Lord Spencer told him that he had once issued
an order for the removal of an officer from a command,
and the members of the board all refused to sign it, upon
which he said ho would go to Mr. Pitt and have
them all turned out. Where could there be
any responsibility when every man of the board
sat with a rope round his neck, and when' they
could all be turned oat a moment's notice l Sir George
Cockburn actual'y turned out a Lord High Admiral ; for
having a quarrel with the Duke of C arence, he went to
the Duke of Wellington, and the Duke of Clarence was
obliged to resign. It was impossible that the duties of
the Admiralty could be properly carried on when each
lord could act as if he was the board. He had seen a
I lord of the Admiralty, whose signature was necessary to
a paper, sign it without looking at it or kno wing what it
was about. The second secretary of the Admiralty, Mr.
Plano, had lately resigned, and we had not been told
why he did so; but he suspected that gentleman acted
from a conscienti .us feeling that he conid not take
1.5001. a year for merely signing his name to papers. He
(Sir Charles Napier) knew from experience how the
matter worked, for be had often received contra-
dictory orders from the Admiralty. On one occa-
sion Lord Auckland ordered him to take the upper
deck guns out of the St. Vincent, and by the next
mail he received a letter from the senior naval lord
ordering him to put them in again directly. On
another occas on he received orders to send home the
Queen. By the next mail he received a letter reproving
him for sending that vessel home. Shortly afterwards he
received a private note from Vice-Admiral Dundas, say-
ing, "All the clerks are gone ; take this, a private note,
and send the Queen to Malta directly." When he had
the command of the Baltic fleet, he received a letter from
the Admiralty ordering him to proceed to Ingersound.
He bad also an order which he was directed to open in a
certain latitude. He did so, and found an instruction
from the Secretary of State, which was much wiser than
the must
the Admiralty order. In pursuance of the Secretary of
State's instruction he passed through the Belt, and
anchored
e Bay. After remaining there a short
ttihmae, be in
received
have
had a letter
some g
fromo
good
there
reason
s Admiraltyonfor
notstat
obeyingrag
their orders to proceed to Ingersound. It appeared,
therefore, that the orders of the Secretary of State were
not known to the Admiralty. Now if he had gone to
Ingersound there might have been a junction between
the Russians and the Swedes. A few days afterwards he
received a letter from the Admiralty approving of his
conduct in not obeying their orders, and then a letter
followed complaining that he had not gone to Ingersound.
(Laughter.) All these clashing orders were attributable