The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-19 00:00:00

ber of years, and the result of it was that they were
getting down to the appointment of admirals of a rea-
sonable age. With regard to the establishment of coal
depots and the building of transports, the Admiralty
was taking every possible step for the advantage of the
country. The coast-guard, for only 8,004 of whom he
this year took a vote, were rated upon the books cf
three ships, in which they were trained for the perform.
ance of their duties. It was desirable to keep a large
supply of timber in the dockyards, that it might be sea.
voned by the time it would be required, and it was by all
means necessary that an officer of high rank should act
as dockyard superintendent.
The vote was then put and agreed to, as were also a
vote of 1,349,333/. to complete the sum necessary for
the payment of the wages of sail?rs and marines to the
31st of March, 1858, and another of 53,9221. to com-
plete the sum necessary for their victualling for the same
period.
. _

On the motion for the vote of 84,217/. to complete the
sum necessary for the payment of salaries and contingent
expenses at the Admiralty.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS complained that there were no
fewer than 13 solicitors employed in the Admiralty.
Admiral DUNCOMBE thought the residences al-
lotted to the Lord of the Admiralty ought to be turned
into public offices. Advertingto the appointment of Mr.
Phinn to the office of Secretary to the Admiralty, he
characterised it as an unfortunate one, and inquired what
were the causes which led to his retirement.

Sir C. WOOD, in reply to Mr. Williams, said that
considering the extent of the legal transactions of the
Admiralty. 13 solicitors were not too large a legal staff.
Sir C. NAPIER asked if it was the intention of the
Government, in the plan for the proposed ne iv public
offices, to make any provision for removing the civil de-
partment of the Admiralty from Somerset-house to the
new buildings.
Mr. OSBORNE replied that no such removal was con-
templated by the Government. Referring to an observa-
tion which had fallen from the hon. and gallant member
opposite (Admiral Duncombe) respecting the retirement
of Mr. Phinn from the Admiralty, he wished to observe
that few persons had done themselves greater honour
than Mr. Phinn during the short time ho held office. Ho
thought it ungenerous that the gallant admiral did not
put himself in possession of that information on the sub-
ject' which he ought to have had before bringing it for-
ward. The office which Mr. Phinn had relinquished bad
been pressed upon him, and he refused it two distinct
times; but while he held it he acquitted himself with
great credit. He left that office for his profession. What
his private reason was for doing to ho (Ur. Osborne)
was not able to judge ; but as to his appointment being,
as the gallant admiral said, an " unfortunate choice," no
better choice could be made by the Government. Whe-
ther Mr. Barrow, or any other clerk of the Admiralty,
ought to have been put in the situation, he (Kr. Osborne)
would not pretend to say • but he must protest against
an hon. member taking advantage of his position in that
house to make such a statement as the gallant admiral
had made.

Admiral DUNCOMBE remarked that whenever he
entertained an opinion on any subject, he never should
be ashamed to express it either in the house or out of it.
Mr. W. MARTIN, as a near relation of Mr. Phinn,
expressed his thanks to the First Lord of the Admiraity,
and the hon. member who had just sat down, for having
come forward so kindly and generously to defend his
relative.

The next vote, for a sum of 118,1501., to defray the
expenses of the coast-gard service, and the Royal Naval
College, wars agreed to without remark.
On the next vote, for a sum of 33,0911., to defray the
expenses of the scientific department of the navy,
Admiral WALCOTT asked what was the full amount
of the expenditure for that purpose ?
Sir C. WOOD said a considerable portion of the sum
named was emp ended in the purchase of chronometers for
the royal navy.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the statement of his right hon.
friend at tie head of the Admiralty appeared to him very
clear and satisfactory, and he only rose to a.k for some
details as to the scientific expedition lately fitted out to
the south coast of Africa.

Ssr C. WOOD said, so far as he knew, that expedition
was not fitted out by desire of the Admiralty, although
the Admiralty had given leave to officers to embark in it.
The expedition in question was sent out with a view to
further explorations of the African rivers.

Sir J. dRA_LIA VI said perhaps his right hon. friend
could explain what progress ha•l been made in a survey
of the River Thames, for which money had been voted
for so many years by Parliament ?

Sir C. WOOD said it was quite true money had been
voted on many occasion for the survey of the Thames,
but it was found that every year the sands shifted, so
that a survey made five years ago would be of no use at
the present time.

In reply to observations by Mr. WARRE and Mr. A.
STAFFORD,

Sir C. WOOD said that estimates respecting the expe-
dition in question would in due time be laid before the
houe.

In reply to remarks by Mr. LAIRD,

Sir C. WO JD said that the fullest instructions had
been given on several occasions to officers of the royal
navy to obtain information relative to the most prolific
guano deposits in various quarters of the globe.
On the vote of 92;2241. for her Majesty's Ravel estab-
lishments at home,
Sir J. TRELAWNY, referring to the observations be
had already made upon the want of proper encourage-
ment to masters in the naval service, said that be bad not
yet received any reply from the right hon. baronet. In the
present vote there was included a sum of 8001. for the
salary of the captain-superintendent of Deptford dock.
yard. Why weie not such appointments as those given
to deserving masters in the navy ? Such appointments
were often filled by persons who had little acquaintance
with naval matters. He would move, as an amendment,
that the vote be reduced by the sum of 8001. in question.
An HON. MEMBER seconded the motion.
Sir C. WOOD defended the vote, and said masters
were not barred from promotion as the hon. member ap-
peared to suppose. He trusted the house would not sanc-
tion the principle of leaving establishments without pro-
per responsible heads.
Sir J. THE LAWNY said that in the army a private
could, by good conduct, attain a commission, and might
rise to a field-marshal. Would the right hon. baronet
the First Lord of the Admiralty give ,him a distinct as-
surance that the same principle would be applied to the
navy ? If not his vague assurance that he was mistaken
was of no weight. He would divide the house upon his
amendment.

The house then divided, and the numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority --212
The announcement was received with much laughter.
The ori:zina.l vote was then agreed to.
Mr. WILLIAMS expressed his surprise that the sum
asked for the present year in the case of seven particular
dockyards exceeded that of the last year of war. It
struck him that it was a very extraordinary way of mak-
ing peace reductionsupen war estimates.

-A. vote of 15,423/. for naval establishments abroad was
next agreed to.
Upon a vote of 584,3901. for payment of artificers,
navvies, &c., in the naval establishments at home,
Sir J. GRAHAM was anxious to draw the attention
of Government and the committee to the object of this
vote, although he could not say he was at presen t prepared
to propose any reduction in respect of it. The state-
ment which the right hon. bars. at the head of the Ad-
miralty made in the early part of the discussion upon the
estimates, to the effect that her Majesey's Government
had no intention of discharging any of the naval service
men without strictly fulfilling the engagements made
during the war, was, he felt sure, hailed with considera-
ble satisfaction by every member of that house. The die-
cussion with reference to the number of ships was very
important, but he still thought that every consideration
with regard to the efficiency of the navy was secondary
when compared with our having at all times a sufficient
number of able seamen at our cenamand. There was no-
thing which bad, been done that he more approved of
than the introduction of continuous service. If there
were any difficulty in reducing the number of trained
men, then he thought the country ought to consent to
give them small pensions. As to economy, there was 'a
difference between the sailors and marines and those em-
ployed in the dockyards. The number of artificers and
labourers eraployed in the dockyards was between 10,000
and 11.000. The average number was the same as last
year. Was it fitting that, as a peace establishment, they
should keep 4,000 shipwrights—being exactly the same
number as was employed in the last war ? After compli-
menting Lord C. Paget for his services in the late war,
the right hon. gentleman proceeded to say that he agreed
with his right hon. friend the First Lord of the Admiralty
that it was not expedient to stop the building of the line-
'of-battle ships of the largest size. Whilst the great mari-
time powers of Europe and also America continued to
build ships of the largest class, it was not possible for
England, with a due regard to her maritime superiority,
to discontinue bedding them. It was a question of pro-
portion in degree, and he agreed entirely with his light
hon. friend (sir C. Wood) that this country ought to have
an ample supply of vessels of the largest class. The great
exertion at the beginning of the late war was to have a
sufficient force of line-of-sattle ships, for the Russians
had 30 sail of the line. Soon alter the want of gunboats
and smaller vessels was felt„ but no at we possesE ed a compa-
rative!y strong force of bo th line-of-battle ships and gun
boats. Ile believed for channel service, and the purposes
of defence on our own sl Lorca, that those small vessels
would be found of inestimable value; but, if they were
to struggle for naval stoserierity in the Atlantic or the
Mediterranean, that must be done by ships of the largest
size. (Hear.) It was lave opinion that, if economy was
to be enforced, it ought to he in our dockyards. The
number now employed -there was 10,800, of whom 4,000
were shipwrights and 7:50 boiler-makers. This vote had
undergone no reductieen. He (Sir J. Graham) thought
upon this head there c ught to be reduction. It was of
the greatest iinportap ce to keep up the number of effec-
tive seamen, but he -thought tbet expense ought to be
counterbalanced by :reductions in other departments of
the service.

Sir E. PERRY spoke on behalf of the unskilled
labourers in dockyards, whose case deserved the kind
and attentive cons ideration of the Government. The
Admiralty order of 1844 was founded upon the necessity
of raising the wai;es of the men, arising from the high
price of provisions ; and what he wished to press upon
the Government was that a similar state of things ex-
isted now. In the article of leather, of coals, and of
butter, a large increase of price had taken place. The
Admiralty bad already given way in the case of Skilled
labourers, and his thought that unskilled labour had the
same claims. This latter class were in fact worse
off than they were 15 or 20 years ago. He also 'wished
that the clerks oof the Admiralty, in making the proper
returns, would so far abandon their old forms as to
des=ignate the dc.ckyard of the town he bad thelonour
to represent (D. vonport) by its proper name, and not
by that of Plymt.utb, a place two miles off:
Mr. MARM, said be had ascertained that in the

county of Warwick the average rate of wages for la-
bourers was 12e., which was just what unskilled
labourers had in her Majesty's dockyards; but there
was this diffirence that, in Warvvickohire, a labourer's
cottage could be had for 41. or under 51. a-year, whereas
it was impossible to get a decent lodging in Woolwich,
Chatham, or Rochester, under 7/ , 91., or 101. a-year.
He had been told Wit the smiths in the dockyards had
had their wages raised to 15W. because they could not
leave the Tard in the day time, but were obliged to stay
to keep the forges in ; but the ropemakers, who were
equally compelled to stay to keep up the fires of the
steam engines, were allowed only 12s. Hon. members
could form no idea of the distress that now prevailed at
Woolwich.

Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE had a word to say for the ,
artisans and mechanics employed at Rochester. He re-
ferred to the ropemakers, sailmakers, and others. They
were receiving 3s. 6d. a day, or 1/. ls. a week, whilst in
other places the same claes of labourers were certainly
paid at the rate of 5.. a day. If the work were not well
done the consequences might be very fearful. The Go-
vernment could not get their work well done unless they
paid a good day's wage for a good day's work.
Sir-F. SMITH quite concurrei in the statements made
with regard to the workmen's wages, and he believed the
smiths were the worst paid men in the dockyards, and
pail less than in any private establishment.
Sir G. PECHELL could nut help expressing his great
regret at the abeente of his right hon. friend, late the
member for Gloucester (Admiral Berkeley). With re-
gard to his popularity in the service, it was due to his
having given the men good clothing, good pay, and
good living, and no doubt it would be great disappoint.
ment to him not to be present so witness the effect
which his excellent management had produced.
Gen. CODRINGTON said the complaints lately made
with regard to the pay of the labourers at Woolwich had
been great, and although he could not agree that the
wages inside ought to be equal to those paid outside the
yard, still the proportion ought not to be so great as to
put the Government men in a disadvantageous position.
In some cases the labourers in the yard had been re-
duced to 12s. a week, and that was really a low rate of
wages ; but the main point was, that the Government
were entitled, if they paid the best wages, to the best
workmen which the labour required.
Mr. TOWNSEND also complained that 12s. was a
very small sum to enable the men to provide for their
wives and families. He should be glad to hear of their
being paid 153. or 1/. a week for their services.
Sir C. WOOD was obliged to his right hon. friend
(Sir J. Graham) for his observations with regard to the
system of victualling, and they should be adopted. As
to the number of artificers not having been reduced, be
must remind his right hon. friend that the number was
not increased during the war. The number this year
would not be greater than existed in 1845. The late ad.
dition was made by hirine extra men. The number in
1845 was 10,872 ' • in 1848, 12,500 ; in 1849, 10,953 ;
and in this year, 10,850, being nearly the same number
as in 1845. The increased number of the steam ships
' of the navy required a much larger number of smiths to
be employed in the yards than formerly. Extra labourers
had to be employed during the war to assist the arti-
ficers in carrying material; and otherwise, but these men
bad since, after three months' notice, been discharged.
The hon. members for the dockyard towns had pressed
hard upon him the qnestion of the wages of the dock-
yard labourers, and he found it very difficult to yield to
that kind of pressure on the one hand, and to the call
for economy on the other. (Hear, hear.) Before the
war all these labourers worked for day wages, buteohen
the war broke out a system of taskwork was introduced,
and the pay of the artificers increased. When peace
came they had to make reductions, and their first step
was to discharge the extra men as he had before stated,
and gradually to bring the establishment to what it was
before the war, and, as far as possible, to the same
scale of remuneration. They had found it necessary,
however, in order to retain certain classes of efficient
artificers, to increase their pay. The Board of Ad-
miralty had made inquiry as to the wages paid in
private yards, but he would remark that no
rule could be founded on that, as they varied
very much in the several ports of the kingdom.
The dockyard labourer, however, was in a far better
state than the agricultural labourer, or the labourer
in private yards, because the former was perma-
nently employed, and when disabled from work he was
pensioned for the remainder of his lite. They ought,
therefore, to be able to get efficient artificers and la-
bourers at the wages they were now giving in the
yards. All these matters were, however, under the
consideration of the Board of Admiralty, and all they
were anxious to do was, to do justice to the artificers
and, at the same time, not unnecessarily increase the
expenditure. (Hear, hear.)
After some further conversation, the vote was
agreed to.

A vote for 33,383/. for the wages of artificers and
labourers in naval establishments abroad was agreed to.
On the ♦ote of 895,450/. for naval stores and steam
machinery,

Sir G. PECHELL trusted that the right hon. gentle-
man had taken into consideration the large consumption
of coal that had taken place.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that this was a very
important vote. He wished to ask upon what ground
they were going to vote this large sum for naval stores ?
Up to the present time there had been already voted
7,000,0001. for stores ; and the house really knee noth-
ing of the stock in hand. He thought they were voting
in a year of peace a sum totally unknown to their naval
estimates. Another question, well worthy the attention
of the committee, was, what became of the stores that
were of no use ? What were called old stores were very
often new stores. The country very frequently lost by
this buying and selling, for they bought dear and sold
cheap. (Hear, hear.) He believed that if this expen-
diture was carried out they would have to vote new
tares next year. He wished also to ask whether all
these stores were used for naval war purposes? if any
wore wanted for miscellaneous purposes, they ought to
be separated from the naval war expenditure.
After a few words from Mr. KINNAIRD,
Sir C. WOOD said that he hoped to give teeright hon.
baronet some satisfaetory explanation on the subject of
stores. He had stated the other evening that there had
' necessarily been a great expenditure this year, and there
would be during subsequent years ; because the expen-
diture during the war on certain articles was necessarily
heavy. The largest item of expenditure was for the pur-
chase of timber. The expenditure of shipbuilding timber
in 1852 was 18,700 loads. In 1853 it was 20,000 loads;
and in 1856 it was 40,000 loads. The amount of ship-
building timber in store on the 31st December, 1855,
was 63,000 loads, which was reckoned to be three year's
consumption ; and on the 31st December last year there
were 56,000 loads, being 7,000 loads below the esta-
blishment. When war was being carried on, they had
to enter into contracts fur the supply of timber which
generally ran over two or three years, and in point of
fact there were contracts running now fora greater
amount of timber than would be delivered during the
next year. However, they would be leaving the yards
in an improper state if they did not, at an early a period
as possible, get the timber up to.the establishment. Sup-
pose a sudden demand came, what would be said if
they left the yards below the establishment of seasoned
timber ? The same reasoning applied to most of the
items of heovy stores—hemp, canvass, and copper. The
expenditure of last year was far beyond the ordinary
course, but it was absolutely necessary under the cir-
cumstances. He assured the committee, on the autho-
rity of the superintendent of stores, that none of the
army stores had been sold which were available for the
navy. •
Mr. BLAKE NIORE regretted so great a reduction as
was proposed in the vote for our iron steam navy from
600,0001. to 345,0001., for he was satisfied it was one of
the most important departments in which this country
contended with the rivalry of other nations.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the vote of 378,415/. fur new works, improve-
ments, and repairs in the naval establishments,
Sir J. GRAHAM wished the right hon. gentleman
to give some explanation of the large outlay for repair of
machinery at Chatham, amounting to 160,0001., and
56,0001. for the same purposes for Pembroke dockyard.
He also complaiued that there was 26,0001. for the break-
water at Plymouth ; but he was at a loss to know how
the money was to he employed.
Mr. MAGUIRE wished to draw. attention to a sub-
ject which was not only unfair to Ireland, but dangerous
to the empire. He found that there were sites for 600,0001.
ter works in England, and oily 1,5001. for works in Ire-
land. Queenstown, which was one of the finest natural
harbours in the, world, was altogether neglected, and in
case of vessels being driven by distress into this harbour
there were no means of assisting them at the command
of the Government ; the steam tugs belonging to the
merchant service were employed, and it was often a
mercy that the vessels were not lost.
Mr. BLAKEMORE asked what steps the Govern-
ment had taken for the protection of commerce in the
Bristol channel?

Sir C. WOOD said—At Chatham, where vessels were
admitted tor repair, and finally fitted out, it had been
properly determined to take additional land for the con-
struction of a basin and other works, which it was hoped
might be executed entirely by convict labour. Convict
prisons had been built on the adjacent ground, and con-
victs had been placed in them in considerable numbers.
The works at Sheerness were on a comparatively small
scale, and the position of the Ova was so inconvenient
that he almost grudged the money, but it became neces-
sary to make some preparations for vessels coming in
there for repair. With regard to Queenstown he could
not hold out any hope that any large works would be un-
dertaken in Cork harbour. In reference to the Bristol
channel he had to state that a coast guard vessel had
been stationed at a certain distance up the channel, but
as the position was found to be very dangerous, it had
bean removed to a place of greater security.
S:r J. GRAHAM expressed his regret that the force
of marines was to be reduced. It was of the last im-
portance to maintain that force with a large establish-
ment, oven in a time of peace. This was a question
which could only be regarded in conjunction with the
votes for the army. He was decidedly of opinion with
the gallant admiral, that the larger portion of the garri-
sons of the outports should consist of marines, particu-
larly Devcripsrt, Portsmouth, Chatham, and Woolwich,
and it was quite possible by some arrangement with the
Minister for War to have occupied by marines in a time
of peace some of the barracks at those places which had
heretofore bean tenanted by the army.

Sir C. WOOD said that at Woolwich there were good
and extensive barracks for the marines, and it would,
therefore, be unnecessary to make any additions at that
place. The barrack accommodation at Portsmouth and
at Plymouth was insufficient for the accommodation of
the soldiers, and it would therefore at present be impos-
sible to station the marines in barracks at those places.
The vote wai then agreed to.
A vote of 13,000/. for medicines and medical stores
was neat agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained
leave to sit again.