The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-25 00:00:00

i

. /
1.3 ,
~..-1 '...7-.0 ' ..1,--'7 '''' '''. ';.--,
~.r7'.
'
) t" :):;-i 1 GAT j_
~..„ ~..;:re;
_ . , .. . .. _
~
~
. - I
'°/,'. _Z2--- -e—e_ ' Z.•;.r
;---1111,..-- ..
:
• .
k•-t:.• 4,4 ,i
-.
*6: --)• d , .1,-.11:6 _
411 . .
„.,_ . .„....to
~,_r; at,' • 3,,
,n,
,r...... , . -
4k, .e _
__.r!ARL:::.REDNTO:II):,‘C
, - •F' ~, ..!. 076‘,.." --, fr•—• -.7'4 '''3"
'•••
:::
,e, , , ,-, ..e.,,
„ \\
17,,,11'
.6 crwB,o, ' 11111114,., .
s ' , ..
\--C'
*,4 '4
.T. --,. •
~,
~,_' , •
1 . ..., , ~,,
• a,
. '' ' I tWI
,/.,,, 1,C77-i---4/1-• iis ,„ ,94 ,N t'.,,,, .:!-• ‘... A ~i; 1' 1,4,- .-14L>)
- ,-- • (Iv - , /, ,- w...-...„ A-, .2' Az, ,• A ... t 0 tar!, • ' ------.- i• \ \ ,13- ' ---,. , 0,,,,,
•••:-.2 -----;,.,, .1, -,.Ap, Li... ',- Lzi pp.: 7,"41,,itt
~.. , / ,tO ., I I'lr, rner:Jr, '...,
~
,R OIT • ' •‘.` '''\ V ...,.,,- ':-- ''--- - C•........:•....
- -
, ..
...,.
`t ; , .
_. 4,
_. _ —4P- osall—°: Aillirrily7:lE- E S:tit

This committee resumed its sitting yesterday,
Mr. Henley in the chair. The other members pre-
sent were Sir J. Graham, Sir M. Seymour, Admiral
Duncombe, Sir H. Willoughby, Sir T. Baring. Mr.
Stansfeld, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Finlay, Mr. Bruce,
Lord Clarence Paget, Sir J. Pakington, Mr. Whit-
bread, and Mr. Clay.
Admiral Sir George Seymour was examined at
some length as to the working of the Board of
Admiralty, and the authority exercised by the First
Lord. He stated that when he was a member of
the board under Lord Haddington, Sir George
Cockburn, the first naval lord, generally suggested
e
ofthwe
asnaavdavlaulto;gdesobuescatmoe
the answer to be given to the different cotnmunica-
tions"that were brought before the board. The points
which arose were generally decided by a majority
of -votes. The effect of the members of the board
h
business.
ntuhgs
euhssesi
.ne
disregarded
ht: gt ei
mode
ioedre that the
busi-
nessw
profes-
sional Never heard his brother in•law, Sir Thomas Hardy,
at
on
the public interests.
Never
say that Sir J. Graham carried matters with a high
' advicetransactingth
matters. Knew that Sir T. Hardy enter-
tained a very high opinion of Sir J. Graham:
Sir J. Pakington—A distinguished witness has
stated that he regards the First Lord as responsible;
that the board can only work by the First Lord
exercising his authority to such an extent as to
render the board subservient to his will ; that he
ought to be regarded as a minister of marine. Does
that description accord with your ideas of the work-
ing of the board ?
general
reaannnedsr:aocl:
Admiral Seymour—By no means. If there were
any person who 'really exercised . the principal func-
tions in my time it was Sir G. Cockburn. Lord
Haddington Lever attempted to take upon himself
the authority of a minister of marine. Sir W.
Parker, the best natal authority of the present day,
entertains the same opinion as myself, that there
Qught net to be a supremacy on the part of the First,,,
Lord'or any member of the hoard..
Do you-think that some one member of the board
should be responsible for the manning of the navy
and the naval reserve ?—Yes, I think so.
Do you think it desirable that the comptroller of
the navy should be a member of the board P—Yes,
and be co-equal with the other members of the
board.

By Lord Clarence Paget—The claims for promo-
tion are examined by the First Lord. The memo-
rials and claims for promotion are sent to the pri-
vate office. I suppose it is the duty of the private
secretary of the First Lord to make a careful dis-
crimination of the claims. That office is a most
important one, and I think should invariably be
given to a naval officer. I have seen no cause of
dissatisfaction with the choice made by the First
Lords for several years. I think it would be de-
sirable, before a promotion takes place, that the
name should be laid on the table, so that the other
lords might be able to express their opinion.
Admiral Bowles was the next witness examines.
In reply to questions by Admiral Duncombe, ho
said—When the naval board was abolished a
wholesome check on the Admiralty ceased to exist.
Whilst that board existed the Admiralty were con-
stantly informed how far the materials for the navy
were diminished. In consequence of the necessity
of appeasing the House of Commons by low esti-
mates, we have lived to see the naval forces of Eng-
land scarcely equal to that of France : and it is
oily by dint of extraordinary exertions that we are
able to bring ourselves to our former superior posi-
tion.

Admiral Duncombe—ls it your opinion that
since the abolition of the naval board the building
department has not received that attention under
the management of the comptroller which you
thick desirable ? I think that was the great cause
of cutting down the navy in a most dangerous way.
I think the board, as now constituted has not suffi-
ciently brought under its notice the state of the
ships and the materials in the dockyards.
What would you suggest as the remedy P I
think the first step has already been taken by the
Duke of Somerset in re• establishing the comptroller
of the navy, with increased powers. He was for-
merly considered an inferior officer. I think his
position would be greatly improved by a seat at
the board. If he were considered a colleague the
business of the board might be conducted in an
amicable way. The country will be in the greatest
danger until measures are taken which will enable
us to exert greater energy and activity when danger
arises.
The committee then adjourned.