The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-30 00:00:00

THE SUN,

commanders, 33. It was not by the pay that officers
were kept in the service, but by the hopes of obtaining
those rewards and distinctions to which they looked for-
ward throughout, the whole of their lives.—(Cheers.)
A comparison had been made between the Itritish and
the American servic"; but the half-pay in the latter was
higher than in the former. He would not veetuie any
crude suggestions on the subject. He did not mean to
say, as the lower class officers had been reduced, that
it might not be right to reduce the higher class also; but
it was not advisable at the present moment to press such
an arrangement, and the more he considered the subject
the more he felt convinced that it would be a most un-
wise economy to adopt the recommendation of the Com-
mittee in this respect. He apprehended his Hon. Friend
would not divide on the question in its present shape;
but he thought it nevertheless right to state that he w
not prepared to make any alteration at present.
Captain PELHAM thought an sequiescence in the
motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose would be
equivalent tc a breach of faith. The best remedy would
be to practise economy in the naval expenditure. Great
reductions had already been made in the establishments
of our dockyards, and he believed they might be carried
much farther, especially by adopting the system of build-
ing the smaller vessels by contract. Great reductions
might also be made in the number of seamen employed
in the fleet. He would disfranchise every man
employed in the dockyards, and would not have au many
of the Admiralty sitting in Parliament.
Mr. COBDEN observed that it was said out of doors
that whenever retrenchment was the order of the day
they always began with the weaker parties, but it would
now be known whether the House was influenced by
aristocratic prejudices, or not. The report of the Com-
mittee recommended that the number of admirals should
be gradually reduced from 150 to 100, not by dismissing
any of them, or depriving any existing admiral of his
flag, or his rank, or his pay. They would ;now see
if equal justice was to be done. But they were told
that even ander existing circumstances there
was little chance enough of promotion. Now, it ap-
peared to him that the navy was kept up for the pur-
poses of war, and officers who entered the service in
times of peace must not look to promotion to the same
extent as in time of war. The service ought not to be
made the means of providing offices to serve the interests
of individuals, but should be regulated with reference to
the public requirements, otherwise they would be sub-
stituting principles of charity and benevolence in the
place of justice to the interests of the commuuity at
large. For these reasons he would support the motion
of his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose.
Admiral DUNDAS said the number of admirals had
been diminished. In 1816 there were 2:20, and now
only 150, which was not too large a number for the re-
quirements of the service.
Mr. HUME maintained that the naval service, in its
present condition, was more like a pension list than
anything designed to carry out the legitimate objects of
the public service.
Captain BERKELEY said there could not be a
greater mistake than to suppose that the navy was main-
tained for the sake of providing places for the aris-
tocracy, for most of those who had attained the highest
rank had entered the service perfectly friendless. He
knew instances in which men had served twenty-seven
years, and had ultimately arrived at the rank of rear.
admiral, with the pay of 4501. a year. Now, he should
like to see any man after the same period of service in
any public office ashore who would not be in a better
position. Let them make a just bargain with the ser-
vice if they pleased, but he protested against the breach
of faith which was involved in the motion of the Lion
Member for Montrose.

Mr. BRIGHT denied the existence of any. bargain
- - -

that a man o❑ entering the service should be made an
admiral at some period of his life.—(Hear, hear.) It
was the strangest idea of the public service he hal ever
heard. The only contract with a man on entering the
service was, that upon certain princip!es laid down,
either according to seniority or merit, they should have
promotion to reach such a stage as their services and

length of life would permit.
Colonel THOMPSON could not help saying that he
was obliged to agree with the Hon. Member for Man-
chester that there could not by possibitity be any such
principle as officers claiming promotion beyond that
which wa; necessary far the service. He never heard
such a principle spoken of in the service to which he had
the honour to belong. He was sure that a cornet did not
expect to be a lieutenant till a lieutenant was wanted, or
a lieutenant expect to be a captain till there was a troop
for him. He, therefore, felt under the necessity of voting
with the Hon. Member for Manchester.

Admiral BO WLES supported the vote.
Mr. HUME remarked that it was the Admiralty itself
that proposed in 1830 that only one should be promoted
to the rank of admiral for every three vacancies, till the
number was reduced to 100; but the Admiralty did not
act up to that.
Sir F. T. BARING said it was his firm conviction,
that if they carried out the recommendation of the Com-
mittee, it would at first be attended with an increase of
expense. He did not mean to say but that by a well-
considered scheme they could rkduce the number of ad
mirals, and effect a saving thereby.
Mr. CORRY supported the vote on the ground that
not to make the promotion would be to commit a Welch
of faith.

Captain PECHELL complained that Captain Sir
Henry Hart, the hydrographer of the navy, and another
officer who held another appointment, had been com-
pelled to agree to their names being placed on the re-
tired list, being informed that they must either do this
or give up their appointments, while a junior officer had
been permitted to hold the situation of Commissioner of
Greenwich Hospital, and was nut required to place him-
self on the retired list.

Sir T. ACLAND said it was true there was a majo-
rity of the Committee in favour of the recommendation,
but the Chairman, who did not vote, was against it, and
that made it equal. The saving by carrying out the
recommendation would only be 10,0301. a 3 ear, and in a
great maritime country like this he did not think that
was an object to put iu comparison with the just expec •
tations of the gallant man who were waiting for their
promotion.
Sir J. G RA lIAM said he was not in the House when
the discussion commenced, and therefore he was not
aware what was the precise form of the motion, but he
imagined that in point of form it was not a reduction in
the number of admirals that was proposed by the Hon.
Member for Montrose, but that he had raised that ques-
tion by proposing some small diminution in the vote.
In point of substance, the Hon. Member wished to raise
in this Committee the question that was discussed in the
Naval Committee, where the proposition was carried for
which he (Sir J. Graham) held himself responsible, that
there should be a reduction in the number of admirals
from 150 to 100. The Hon. Gentleman the Member

for Devon said that reduction would not be of any great
use, but still they ought to consider that it was a saving;
and the right poiat to which the House of Commons
ought to come was, that in the state service there
ought to be no unnecessary expense. Now he was bound
to say that his Hon. Friend the Member for Tyrone was
equally right in the assertion that the gradual re-
duction of the number of officers on half-pay in the
navy, so far as admirals were concerned, ha l not yet
been carried into effict by only permitting one promo-
tion in three vaeacaacies. The real question was whether
the time had arrived for making the rule which p evaded
all other ranks apply to admirals. Now, it appeared in
evidence that at no time during the sar was there a
greater number of admirals employed by this country
than 32, and that the number employed at the present
time did not exceed 12. Now, he was decidedly of opi-
nion that although the admiral.' lift must be cArsidered
more or less as a reward for past services, yet it was a

question of degree. and they must bear in maid what were
the real wants of the service. It would not do to main-
tain either in the army or navy a very large number of

admirals or generals merely with a view to the reward
for past services, without any regard to the wants of the
public. He hcped that his Right Honourable Friend
Vie Chancellor of the Exchequer had not been misled

by a pamphlet recently published by a banker, in which
it was stated that the people of this country were
amongst the most lightly taxed of any people—that di-
rect taxation might be carried out much further, and in-
direct taxation also extended. He hoped the Right
Hon. Gentleman had not been misled by any of these
arguments. He (Sir J. Graham) questioned whether
the people of this country were lightly taxed. At all
events he was sure that taxation in time of peaco had
arrived at its maximum, and the Right Hon. Gentleman
must be aware that either with direct or indirect taxation
there was considerable difficulty in maintaining the bur-
dens that now existed. He was satisfied the time had
arrived when every practicable economy must be carried
out in every branch of the public service.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the army and navy, there were points
where that economy must commence; and it must com-
mence, not with the lower, but with the higher ranks of
the protessiona.--(Hear.) He would be the last man to
desire that that principle should be carried into effect
rashly, suddenly, or to the injury of those who had a just
claim for immediate promotion, but gradually some better
system might be introduced into the higher ranks of
both services. In time of peace 150 admirals and 270
generals were a larger number than were required.—
'meh elpsroo
numberp
to s:
ot
oi
oof,n
thbae admiralstf,
as
se
u pt hoen shouldtSh Select e
deb
et o
atgraduallyh o Committeefth
three
e
e
reducedav( naseatrh a) t f tr The proposition before the Select Committee
was that the number of admirals should bo gradually
reduced fro
cansstbo ,rp
etoaeni
commanders,thet hdey ea ot hn l
oy promoted
theythr
eoe a one,ndlmyi
ra and as o
promoted
s only
n ly one
thenneeshould death e
lieutenant at h
bof
e,
promoted, till .
the number was reduced to 100
—(Hea
bear.) It might be said that, considering the age of thre,
post-captams,. the probability was, if that rule were
adopted, that in a short time there would be no admirals
sufficiently young and active to undertake the important
duties of naval commanders. But the Committee had
also proposed, in order to give vigour and activity to the
higher branches of the service, that ono out 'of every
three promotions should not go by seniority, but that,
on the responsibility of the Admiralty, officers of
distinguished merit, without reference to seniority,
should be raised to the rank of admiral; whereby the list
would derive the benefit of both vigour and seniority.
Having propounded that view in the Committee, and
having since reflected on it attentively and maintained
it, he did not hesitate to support it now, both by his
speech and his vote.—(Hear, hear.) Ile was decidedly
of opinion that this measure should be adopted, both
with reference to the efficiency of the service, and to the
just claims of the public, for the commencement of some
economy in this branch of the service; and that it ought
also to be extended to the army, as a feasible and safe
proposition. The army stood on better grounds than
the navy; ?tor though the number of generals was 270, a
very large reduction had been effected within a short
period, the non-::ffective charge having been reduced
nearly 90,000/. a year sinca 1846; while in tl.e navy the
charge for the non-effective service was 88,000 i. a year
more than it was in 1846. Since the termination of
the war, the reduction or' the dead weight in the army
had been progressive and great, while in the navy it had
been almost stationary and comparatively nothing. It was
absolutely necessary that a beginning should be made in
reducing the non-effective portion of this service, and

that beginning ought to Le with the higher ranks. The
First Lord of the Admiralty would probably say that
whin a vacancy occurred the command was ivatantiy
taken ; but he was to! I that when a vacancy occurred in
the East India and China statioa thero w"s great dilZi-
culty in tilling it up; that three or four refused it; that
the officer who had gone out there was nearly seventy
years of age; and that there had been some arrangement
whereby he took the command.—[Sir F. T. BARING
was understood to deny this ] If this were the case in
time of peace, what would be the condition of the ser-
vice if unhappily we were involved in war? It was in-
dispensable to have youth and vigour on the admirals'
list; and that could only he attained by promoting by
merit, as well as by seniority, to the extent of one in
three. Ho considered this point the most important
which had been brought before the Select Committee,
and ho could not hesitate now to support the view he
had there advocated.
S:r F. BARING wished that his Right Hon. Friend
would show, rather by figures than by general phrasal,
what he meant by enforcing economy. He did not re-
gard this as a question of economy at all. The entire
saving, even if you could reduce the number of admirals
from 150 to 100, would scarcely exceed 10,0001.; and it
was no question with him whether this would be a real
saving to the country, while it would be a great injustice
to a noble service. Even if the Government were to
adopt the principle of appointing admirals on the ground
of merit alone, those officers would grow old, and they
did not require merit only in their admirals, but also
youth and activity. If, however, the Government were
to pass over the senior officers and select as admirals
officers low in the list and young in the service,
they might disregard merit to obtain the services of
youth, and he feared such a course would occasion
great dissatisfaction and discontent. That was not a
new suggestion, for ou one occasion the power of the
Crown had been exercised, and with great impar-
tiality, in favour of a young officer, but that step
created great dissatisfaction, and if his recollection
was correct, the House interfered so harshly that the
practice was abandoned. He begged to say, in reply to
the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, that no arrangement
of the nature be had alluded to had been made with the
gallant admiral in command on the East India station.
The Right Hon. Baronet bad also asked whether it was
true that that command had been offered to two officer::
before it was accepted by the gallant admiral by whom
it was now held. It was perfectly true that the appoint-
ment had been declined by two admirals, on the ground
that their health would not enable them to undertake
the duties, and he (Sir F. Baring) thought those gallant
officers had acted most conscientiously in declining the
offer on that ground. He was far from saying that if
the present arrangement did not work well, the whole
subject ought not to be considered, but he did not think
it would be advisable to consider the case of the admirals
apart from that of the service generally.
Sir J. GRAHAM observed, Ithat the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet called upon him to state the precise amount of
saving he proposed to effect by reducing the list of
admirals from 150 to 100. He could only say that if
the reduction of one-third in the number of admirals

would effect no material saving in the half-pay of admi-
als it was a case of despair.—(Hear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet appeared to think that it would not be
possib!e to add any fresh youth, vigour, and activity to
the list by means of selection. If then they could
neither reduco the expense, nor render this class of
officers more c fficicnt by infusing health and vigour into
it, he (Sir J. Graham) thought the cue of the admirals
was desperate.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENLEY said this was a very important ques-
tion, for it appeared that while the amount expended in
pay and wages for the effective force of the navy was

,322,000 L, the cost of the non-effective s.!rvice was

1,221,0001. —(Hear, hear.) He was satisfied this was a
state of things the country would not allow to be confi-
rmed. For thirty-five years since the peace the system
had gone on without alteration, and they were now pay-
ing the same number of officers for doing nothing that
they were maintaining when they had a.large naval force
all .at. He was glad this question had been raised, for
he considered the non-Jfeetive force cf the navy ought
to be kept within more reasor able bounds, and he would
cordially support the amendment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished

to say a few words on this subject, as it was one with
regard to which he had had somo Admiralty exp,rience.
He must say he deprecated more than anything the in-
terference of the Howe of Commons iu these mutters.—

(Oh, oh, and a laugh.) He did not mean as to what
was to be done, but ai to how it was to be done.—
(Laughter.) When he became S,aretary to the Ad-
miralty a system of reduction was in active operation.
It was going on rapidly, and what stopped it?
What was the cause of that increaso of deadweight in
the navy, of which Hob. Gentlemen now complained ?
It was the interference of the House of Cotnnaous.—

(A cry of "No," and a laugh.) Yes, it was the inter-
ference of the House with the reductions then in pro-
gress. Several motions, as the Hon. Member for Mon-

hose might remember, were made and carried with a
view to accelerate the promotions, which the House
thought were not rapid enough, and the consequence
was a great addition to the retired list. It must not be said,
then, that the Government had been anxious to continue

the present system. He conscientiously believed that the
Government was far better able than the House of Com-
mons to form a judgment as to the mode in which re-
ductions might be effected.
Captain HARRIS observed that officers, whether
admirals, captains, or lieutenants, were not made in a
day, and it was necessary to keep up the half-pay system
that they might have efficient men upon the list who
would be available in case of emergency. He did not
concur in the opinion of the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer that the Executive Government could conduct
changes in these matters most advantageously without
the interference of that House, for the House of Com-
mons was bound to take care that there was no extrava-
gant outlay of the public money.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... 72
Against it ... 128
Majority ...-56

Sir G. PECHEIL made some remarks:upon the mode
in which the allowance for bringing specie from abroad
was appropriated.
Sir F. BARING said a few words in justification of
the system.
Captain BOLDERO reminded the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman that this vote included surgeons and assistant-
surgeons, with respect to whom there was a recent vote
of the ouse ;ho believed some regulation was to be
made for their benefit.

Sir F. BARING had already explained t 3 the Hon.
and Gallant Member the course intended to be pursued;
a memorandum had been drawn up, and the arrangement
would be carried into affect.

The vote was agreed to.
The following votes were also agreed to:— .
493,345/. for military pensions and allowances.
167,086/. for civil pensions and allowanca.
135,7004 for freight of ships for conveyance of
troops, &c.
21,1311. for extra pay, &c., of seamen and marines,
in lieu of spirits, and for extra pay, &c., for the Arctic
Searching Expedition.
8,4801 for extra provisions for the ships employed
in the Arctic Searching Expedition.
The next vote was 764,236 L for the Post-office packet
service.

Mr. SCOTT moved to reduce the vote by 50,000/.,
charg,d for the conveyance of the India mails by the
East India Company's vesels.
Sir F. BARING reminded the Hon. Member that the
pat went must be made as long as the contract with the
company subsisted.
Lord NAAS thought that after the contradictory
statements they had heard from the Chancellor of the
Exchequer and the Hon. Member for Honiton (Sir J.
W. Hogg), it was understood the vote fir the Indian
mail service would be postponed till the House had had
an opportunity of judging what was the real state of the
case by the production of the correspondence between
the Government and the East India Company.
The CHANCE LLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed,

that the production of the correspondence could have no
effoct on a contract which had been already completed.
Whatever opinion the House might have a 3 to any future
arrangement, it was evident that whit had been entered
into by Government must be carried out.
Mr. HUME suggested, that in future an account
should be laid before Parliament of the several contracts,
of the number of ships, of the distances, and of the ex•

cease on one side; and of the profits, by passengers and
from other sources, on the other. No vote required a
closer scrutiny, and the opinion of competent persons out
of doors was, that many of our mail contracts were ex-
tremely extravagant. The House ought to have some
intimation► when stew contracts were to be made.

Mr. SCOTT agreed with the Hon. Member that the
votes for the mail service required very close observa-
tion. It was rumoured that a certain company, who
were disappointed in getting the contract for the mails
to the Brazils, were likely to obtain the contract for the
Cape mails, by way of making up for their disappoint-
ment. The vote ought not to be passed without some
explanation, though no Hon. Member connected with
Government had yet condescended to give any.
Sir F. BARING observed that the statements to
which the Hon. Member referred were, like many others
brought against the Admiralty, quite without foundation.
There was no truth in them; and it could not be ex-
pected that the time of the House was to be taken up in
noticing every story that might be rumoured abroad.
Tho Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) could have every infor-
mation he desired as to the mail contracts.
Sir J. GRAHAM inquired what arrangements had
been made for the conveyance of the mails between
Holyhead and Dublin ? It had been strongly recom-
mended by the Committee that the same company who
had carried the mails between Liverpool and Dublin
should become the lessees of the establishment, which
had cost the country a very considerable sum; and he
observed that the expenses had increased since 1849.
Sir F. BARING was understood to reply that ar-
rangements had been made for carrying the mails by
contract, which would be carried into effect as soon as

possible. There were charges against the Admiralty
on this point also, but they referred not to the Admiralty
having done badly to the public, but to their having
taken the lowest contract, which was said to be so low
that it could not be worked.
In reply to a question from Lord NAAS,
Sir F. BARING stated that the tenders for the mail
contracts to the Cape would be returnable on the 13th of
August; and in reply to Mr. Scott, said that the ser-
vice would be taken by screw-steamers.
In reply to Mr. T. EGERTON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
that the Government intended to make the inner har-
bour at Holyhead at the public expense. It would be,
he considered, rather hard, under all the circumstances,
to call on the railway company to contribute 900,000/.,
as originally agreed upon, but they would be deprived of
any cxcluslve advantages which were contingent on that
c natribution.

Lard J. MANNERS said he regretted to be obliged
by the condued of her Majesty's Government to move