The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-06 00:00:00

we should not expect to hear publicly made, and I am sure '
the house will feel that in justice to myself I ought to give
some explanation. (Hear, hear.) The gallant admiral
added, that not only did I refuse, but that I made the refusal
with unkindness, and without a conciliatory word. All
I can say is, that if the gallant admiral, when the warmth
of his feelings has subsided, will only refer to the letters
which I wrote, I am sure he will feel that I did con-
vey the refusal which I was sorry to be obliged to make
in the kindest and most conciliatory language which
I could tire. And the simple reason which occasioned
the refusal was iLis—that his case did not come within
the rules of the order. (Hear, hear.) I therefore had
no option in the matter, AO had no power to recom-
mend.—[Admiral Walcott—" I thank I have shown that it
did come within the order.] (Cries of "Order.") Having
made this explanation, I will turn for a few moments to
the motion of the hon. member for 17
sesmouth. I feel
some regret that the discussion should have !limed so much
on the particular case of the reserved captains. (Hear.)
The hon. baronet the member for Portsmouth told :13 that
when he was First Lord he drew up the minute and Ogi-
nated the Order in Council referring to the reserved cap-'
tains, and, that being the case, he knew better than any one
what was the object of it. I think a matter of this kind
must be decided, not by the intention of the Minister, but
by the wording of the order itself. I have given some
attention to the wording of that order, and I think it suffi-
ciently ambiguous to enable the Admiralty to shelter them-
selves under it; but that a strict and fair construction of it
is in favour of the claim of those officers, and I am sorry the
present Board do not seem disposed to take a generous view
of their case. (Hear, hear.) The motion is very much
the same in substance as one which I made last year. The
hon. member moves for a committee; I moved for a com-
mission. I retain the opinion that some inquiry ought to
be granted. (Hear.) I think it is a great evil, and I am sure
the Secretary to the Admiralty will not deny that it is a
great evil, that officers of the British navy should be dis-
contented. (Hear.) I know not how far the Secretary of the
Admiralty thinks, as he once said, that naval officers always
are discontented, and always are grumbling. I do not
think that one of their characteristics—(cheers)—and I
deem it a great national evil that any officer of the service
should have any just cause of complaint. (Hear.) At the
present moment we are particularly called upon to have re-
gard to their claims, as the condition of the navy is not
what it • ought to be. (Hear, hear.) I shall probably re-
vert on a future occasion to that subject, but of this I am
satisfied—that, before we can hope to have the dis-
cipline of the navy in a satisfactory state, we must
take care that the officers are justly dealt with, and that
they have good grounds to be content with their position.
(Cheers.) There are two reasons why inquiry is more called
fer now even than last year. The present Board of Admiralty
have taken into their consideration much that was said last
year with regard to the unsatisfactory pay of the navy,
and especially the pay of the captains. I stated last year
some painful cases which had come under my own observ-
ation, where captains had been compelled to refuse corn.
mand of ships through being unable to afford to accept
them. Tho Board of Admiralty have since drawn up a
new scale of pay, 0;:d unfortunately the result is that it
gives a small boon to at;Zne classes, and it makes other
classes worse off than they were, (Cheers.) I think that
is an additional ground for inquiry. The other reason is of
the same nature. The present Beard have adopted a new
system of promotions and appointments, and that has
failed to give satisfaction to the service. (Hear, hear.) I
am sure the Board of Admiralty can have no wish to have
these feelings of dissatisfaction existing, and we cannot
have a stronger proof that the condition of the navy is not
what it ought to be, than when an officer in the position of
the hon. member for Devonport, fresh from active service,
comes forward to support the statement of the hon. mem-
ber for Portsmouth, and to pledge his important opinion in
favour of inquiry. (Cheers.) I hope the Government will
take these facts into their consideration. All that is asked
is to extend to the navy the same description of inquiry
width has twice been given within the last few years tothe
army. If the causes of dissatisfaction on the part of naval
officers are groundless, the Admiralty will be fortified with
arguments far resisting future motions which they do not
nor possess. If, on the other hand, the naval officers can
establish the justice of their demands, the national feeling
will surely require that those demands should be conceded
(Cheers.)
Lord C. PAGET.—I can quite understanci the hon. mem-
ber for Portsmouth and the hon. member for Devonport
advocating the claims of every class in the navy. I can quite
understand the sympathy of other hon. members when they
hear appeals on behalf of that noble and gallant service
But that a Minister who has known the difficulties under
which the Admiralty labour with the very limited means at
their disposal—who knows that if these things are taken
into consideration in the way he is encouraging the house
to take them into their consideration, the marines and the
army cannot be left out—who is perfectly aware that it is
impossible to give that higher pay which I as a naval man
must feel they ought to receive—who has had an opportu-
nity, when First Lord of the Admiralty, to have rectified
what was wrong—when such a man comes down day after
day to foment discontent in the navy—(no, no)—I say dis-
content in every class in the service, from the officers to the
ships' crews—it is a lamentable fact indeed. (Loud cheers.)
The present Board of Admiralty has been constantly occu-
pied in endeavouring to improve the pay of every class in
the navy. What have we done ? Ido not blame my hon.
friend, because he has not studied what has been done. He
talks of giving command money to captains, and, in truth,
reducing their pay instead of increasing it, but if he had
read carefully the papers on the table ho could not have
fallen into that mistake. (Hear, hear.) Officers in com -
mand of line-of-battle ships will receive about £lOO more
pay than they do at present; officers in command of large
frigates will receive an additional £7O a-year ; while com-
manders and lieutenants will receive command pay. I
shall not ask the right hon. baronet:. opposite to look at the
papers, because I know his object is to snow that we ace
endeavouring to damage the navy rather than doLng what
.we can to improve the position of its officers.
Sir J. PAKINGTON—I emphatically deny that I am
actuated by any such motives as those which the noble lord
has imputed to me. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord is not
entitled to impute motives to any hon. gentleman as ho may
choose to address the house upon a subject of great public
importance. (Near.) I appeal to the Speaker whether the
imputation of motives is not disorderly. (Cheers.)
Lord C. PAGET—It is not my intention to impute to the
right hon. baronet that he knowingly does injustice to the
present Board of Admiralty, but I say that the necessary
effect of his continual harangues about the wrongs of the
navy is to foment discontent in every rank of the service.
(Hear, hear.) Let me put a practical question to the house.
The hon. and gallant member fcr Portsmouth in his able
speech touched upon the case of every class of officer in the
navy. Here, then, you are asked to deal witb between
5.000 and 6,000 commissioned officers, exclusive of warrant
officers. Considering the view which the hon. and gallant
member takes of the proceedings of the Admiralty, he will,
I think, admit that an average of £lO a year to each officer
would not be too much to grant. That addition, however,
would at once amount to an increase of £50,000 or £60,000
a year in our estimates. Is the house prepared to sanction
so considerable an addition to the estimates for the navy ?
Last year we increased the retired pay of almost all classes
in the navy; we gave increased pay to masters, paymasters,
and engineers ; we gave pensions to the widows of warrant
officers; and we endeavoured in various other ways to benefit
the service. I am willing to admit that we have not done all
I could wish, but that is because the Admiralty, with all its
desire to improve the position of every branch of the service
has been obliged on the ground of expense to stay its hand.
The present motion may be divided into two parts. One has
reference to the question of promotion. The hon. and gallant
member for Portsmouth will have an opportunity of bringing
the subject of promotion before a committee which I hope
will be nominated in a few days. It is unnecessary, there-
' fore, to dwell upon that point on thepresent occasion. The
other part of the motion deals with the position of the seve-
ral classes of officers in the navy. I want the house to
consider, if we are to appoint a committee to hear pathetic
stories about the wrongs of individuals— wrongs which, no
doubt, exist in the navy as in other services—and to listen
to the tale of every unfortunate and often ill-used officer in
the navy, what will be the result ? The result will inevi,a.
bly be that the committee will make a report recommending a
considerable increase of pay throughout the navy. Is the
house prepared for that ? As a naval officer myself, I could
not be expected to offer much opposition to it, but I must
say, occupying the position which I do, that I would hesi-
tate before urging such a recommendation upon the house.
I have been told that I should not consider myself as the
Chancellor of the Exchequer of the navy ; but what would
the house say to me if I did not look to the general inter-
ests of the country, instead of simply endeavouring to im-
prove the position of my brother officers? (Hear, hear.)
Some remarks were made by an hon. gentleman opposite
with respect to political influence. I challenge the hon
gentleman to name a case in which an officer has been
promoted through political influence since the Duke of
Somerset became First Lord of the Admiralty.
Sir H. STRACEY.—I did not apply that remark delu-
sively to the present Board of Admiralty. I referred to all
preceding Boards quite as much as to the present.
Lord C. PAGET.—I accept the retractation of the hon,
gentleman.

Sir H. STRACEY.—No, I retract nothing; I merely
explain.

Lord C. PAGET.--I am glad at all events that the lion.
gentleman did not apply his observation particularly to the
present Board of Admiralty, because I know that political
influence has really nothing to do with promotion in the
navy. (Hear, hear.) The hour is se late that I shall not
discuss all the complaints which were made by the hon.
and gallant member for Portsmouth. I shall simply say
that in what we have done during the last two years, in
the addition we have made to the pay of several clasps
of officers, and in our proposal to give command pay to
commanders and lieutenants, we have proved our desire
to improve the position of every branch of the service.
Of course, as may be supposed, I feel a deep interest in
the welfare of naval officers, but I must confess that I
think many of the complaints we hear are unreasonable.
If you appoint a committee to examine into these com-
plaints great demands will be made upon you. Th
appointment of a committee will be an intimation to
every officer to bring forward his claims, and the