rose to bring before the House the present state of our Naval Establishment. He did so entirely from a regard to the interests of the service. He had studied this subject since the time of the war, and he thought that in the present state of the Navy List, it would be impossible to carry on a war with vigour, in consequence of the advanced age of the superior officers of the Navy. The question was one quite unconnected with party politics. Whatever Ministers might be sitting upon the Treasury Benches, whether they were Whigs or whether they were Tories, they seemed to be equally inattentive to the interests of the Navy. He had alluded to the subject when the Navy Estimates were brought forward in 1842; but the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government did not make any reply to his observations. On the 22nd of March in the same year, he moved a resolution on the subject, previous to the granting of the Navy Estimates. The right hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, who, he was sorry to say, was not now in his place, after having pointed out the propriety of allowing officers in the Navy and Army to sell out, said—

"The hon. and gallant Officer had suggested a Retired List; and he would frankly tell him, that, as to the opening of the Retiring List for such aged officers as might be willing in time of peace, when it would be consistent with honour to acknowledge their infirmities, to retire from active service, he would well conceive of considerable advantage in carrying out such a proposition. Nor had he understood his right hon. Friend at the head of the Government, to have ever stated, that such a proposition was not worthy of the most serious attention, or ever to have unequivocally negatived all consideration of the purchase system."

Notwithstanding this, the right hon. Gentleman moved the previous question, and Sir R. Peel again made no reply. The numbers were, Ayes 40; Noes 138. Now, the right hon. Baronet had spoken the truth in stating this, but he had not spoken the whole truth. He had not told the House that officers were forced to put themselves upon the Retired List to which he had alluded. In answer to a question by him on the 28th of April, 1843, Sir Robert Peel said, the subject had been under consideration, but he was not prepared to submit to the House any proposition for forming a Retired List. On May 16th, 1843, he moved the following Address:—

"That a humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to give directions that a certain number of old officers should be allowed to retire on a separate list, with increase of pay—with a view of bringing forward young and active officers."

Lord Ingestre seconded his Motion, and was reprimanded by the right hon. Baronet. In February of this year, he again alluded to a Retired List on going into Committee on the Estimates, but no Member of the Government replied to his observations. The system had been instituted by Lord Howe, and it had continued until the Duke of Clarence had been appointed Lord High Admiral, when an alteration had taken place. The Duke of Clarence had adopted a more just principle. He had adopted the principle that no officer should be promoted to a flag who had not served either four years in time of war, five years in time of war and peace, or six years in time of peace. That Retired List was not a voluntary Retired List—It was formed of officers who had not interest enough to procure employment afloat. The retirement of officers for not having sufficient interest with the Government was caused in a most arbitrary manner. They were compelled to retire if they had not been in service for a certain number of years. By one of the arbitrary rules which formerly existed, officers were passed over who had not commanded line-of-battle ships; but when the late King came into office, he laid down better conditions as to persons filling the office of admirals. A Commission, of which the right hon. and gallant officer (Sir G. Cockburn) was a Member, recommended that some of the older Captains should be taken off the Retired List, and allowed the rank of Rear Admiral, Vice Admiral, and Admiral, but without enjoying the pay. It was necessary that he should show to the House, by a paper which be held in his hand, what was the state of the British Navy at the present moment. The hon. and gallant Officer, then read the particulars as follow:—

There were instances of very gallant actions, fought by Admirals far advanced in life. The case of Admiral Rodney was one, but it was not followed up as it might have been, or eight or ten more of the enemy's ships would have been taken or destroyed. Then there was Lord Duncan, who gained a remarkable victory over the Dutch off the coast of Holland, and although it was fought by an old man, he was an extraordinary man. These, however, were rather exceptions to the rule than otherwise. As to the propriety of employing Admirals so far advanced in life, he was actually shocked when he looked at the returns of the respective ages of the officers of the Navy. That list showed that there were only two admirals and ten vice admirals under seventy years of age; twenty-five rear admirals under sixty-five, and fifteen under sixty years of age. Of the 200 captains in that list, thirty were between seventy and seventy-five years; forty-eight between sixty-five and seventy; sixty-one between sixty and sixty-five years of age, of whom thirty-three had not been employed for upwards of thirty years; and sixty-one under sixty years of age; whilst the youngest was fifty-two years of age, with very few exceptions, they were all bordering on the age of sixty. Of the whole of these officers, the captains, 114 had not been employed at sea for more than thirty years, and many had not been employed in their present rank at all. He (Sir C. Napier) was the last officer promoted before the new regulations, which prevented a man being made a post captain until he was twenty-two years of age. During the war, the average age of officers promoted to be post captains, was about twenty-six years and seven months. The average age at which they had since attained the same rank had increased to thirty years, and at the present day, the average had risen to thirty-five and thirty-seven years, and, according to the latest promotions, that average had increased to forty-two years. Was this sound policy in a great maritime country? He thought not. No one could look at the facts which he had detailed, without trembling for the safety of the country. He would propose not a full remedy, for he knew that would be useless. He dared not go the length he would wish to go, because he knew the Chancellor of the Exchequer would turn round to his right hon. Friend and say, the Exchequer had no money. But he believed there was not one man who had sat at the Board of Admiralty for the last thirty years who had not seen the danger the country was in. He did not believe there was a naval officer in the House or out of it, who was not perfectly sensible of this fact; and the right hon. Baronet, who sat opposite (Sir G. Cock-burn) knew it as well as he (Sir C. Napier) did. He believed the right hon. Gentleman had furnished the Government with a plan of a Retired List; and he did think it extraordinary that the right hon. Baronet, at the head of the Government, when he heard every officer in every part of the country, who knew any thing about the service, declare it impossible to go on in the present state of the Navy, should refuse so modest a request. There were two or three modes of improving the Navy List. One method the right hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, proposed when he was First Lord of the Admiralty, and that was to allow old officers to sell out, and young ones to purchase, under certain regulations. At the time it was proposed he believed it was not approved of, and the right hon. Gentleman was not encouraged to go on with it. He could not see the smallest danger in the plan, and it would cost the Government nothing. The rule at the Admiralty was well known, namely, that the Board should only appoint one officer to three deaths. That rule, while we were at peace with all the world might be a prudent one; but it was found impossible to act upon it. Even during the period of the Chinese war promotions had gone on very rapidly, and still the number of deaths had exceeded considerably the number of promotions. From 1830 to 1843, the number of promotions were 332 captains, 535 commanders, and 945 lieutenants. In a period of less than thirty years, the list of captains had been reduced from 887, which was the number in 1815, to 770, that being the number in 1843. The commanders in 1815 were 892, and in 1843, 1,135, but those were not all regular commanders, as many lieutenants had been allowed to retire with 7s. per day, and the rank of commander. As to the lieutenants in 1815, there were 4,010, and in 1843, 2,637. Now, to return to the subject of selling out, he could not see the slightest objection to it. There might be a rule laid down, confining it to one in three. He would propose, if they allowed selling out to take place, that no officer should have any of the vacancies, or be promoted in the usual way, who had not served five years in the rank below, and this would ensure the vacancies being filled by persons who had served for some time. This would also prevent men of fortune and influence from prevailing on the Admiralty to promote their sons, unless they had served a proper time. He was happy to have it in his power to compliment the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) on the great talent of his son, who was now made lieutenant, who had, in fact, just passed. The privilege of purchasing would be felt by the rich, and would often be a great boon to old officers who might wish to sell out; but the right hon. Baronet's son had obtained his promotion entirely by merit —it was not due to interest, for he had passed a most extraordinary clever examination. If, however, that had not been so, and the rule he proposed were adopted, that young gentleman would have had an opportunity of purchasing a commission without taking away promotion from any other deserving officer. The midshipmen and mates did not begin to grumble if they were only six years beyond their time; but when they found, after being ten or twelve years behind their time, that they were not promoted, they certainly did manifest some dissatisfaction, and he was convinced that it was a crying shame that these deserving men were kept so long midshipmen. He believed that the Navy was the only branch of the service in which there was no such thing as a [voluntary Retired List. In the Royal Ar- tillery, the Engineers, and the Regular Army, there were Retired Lists, but not in the Navy. He found that the following was the return of officers of the under-mentioned ranks upon retired full pay, included in the estimate for the present year 1844–:—

The first column contained the number of officers placed on retired full pay under the warrants of 1831 and 1837. The second column are those placed on full pay under the warrant of July 1840, allowing four lieutenant-colonels, and four captains of artillery, and three lieutenant-colonels, and seven captains of engineers. If officers were not allowed to sell out of the Army, the time would soon arrive when there would be few or no officers who could march with their regiments, but they must get a parcel of chairmen to carry them, if the regiments were ordered to go from one place to another. Why were not the officers of Marines allowed to retire. It was notorious that by far the greater portion of the captains of Marines were too old for active service. When he was in Syria 1,600 Marines were landed from the fleet, and he believed that there was only one captain of Marines who could march properly. One of the officers in command was almost unable to proceed, and fortunately he (Sir C. Napier) succeeded in getting him a donkey, and the officer told him that if he had not brought it he could not have gone on, even if it were to save the lives of all with him. There was not the least want of courage or ability on the part of this or other officers, but the truth was, that they were regularly worn out by length of service. Supposing that he had not been able to procure the donkey, what might have become of those 1,600 Marines. The right hon. Baronet said last year that he had authority for believing that to produce effect they must give the option to at least 150 captains, and added that they would entail an expense of upwards of 20,000l. a-year on the country. Now, he did not ask so much. All that he required was, that 100 captains at the top of the list might have the option of retiring on receiving 100l. a-year additional; that, in point of fact, they should be regarded as out-pensioners of Greenwich Hospital, receiving 100l. a-year instead of 80l., the amount now paid. He did not wish to go to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to ask for money for this purpose; all that he asked was, that as admirals died off, they would devote the amount paid to them for this purpose, and allow at the top of the list to be placed captains on a Retired List, and have this amount divided amongst them in the way that he had mentioned, namely, 100l. a-year addition to their pay. When men remained fifteen years ashore at a time, and were then appointed to the command of a ship, they naturally felt some difficulty in their novel situation. He thought also that it was most desirable, if not essential, that the Retired List should go lower down—to commanders, and, even to lieutenants. He thought that commanders should be allowed to retire after being twenty years on the list on an increased allowance of 6d. a day. He believed that there were more than 1,500 old lieutenants. It had been suggested that they should be allowed to retire at 1s. a day additional allowance; but he would not take that amount, as it was a very large sum, but he threw the matter out for consideration. It was most important that they should reduce the Navy List to an efficient list, and only have on it proper officers who were able to discharge any duty. The proper course would be to do as was done with respect to the Marines at the termination of the war, when a reduction in that branch of the service took place, and a number of officers were allowed to retire on full pay, and no new appointment was made or vacancy filled up but in case of a death. The following was the number of Marine officers under that arrangement:—

He felt that it was not safe to the coun- try or the Navy to let things go on as they did at present. They should either allow officers to sell out, or they should adopt some plan for an optional Retired List. He believed that some forty or fifty years ago, admirals were promoted, not by seniority. This, certainly, was a just ground of complaint, but, if it was found necessary to appoint young men as admirals it might be done by the arrangement which he had suggested. He denied that there was time enough to do this in the breaking out of a war, for if you then made young officers admirals you would be obliged to entrust them with the command of a fleet, when they had had no experience as commanding officers. If a war suddenly broke out you would want almost immediately twenty or thirty admirals fit for active service. Where could you find experienced and active officers, in the prime of life, to take upon themselves such duties as blockades, such as those of Brest, Toulon, Cadiz and other ports, as was the case in the time of Lord St. Vincent? The Navy was very different then from what it was now, as regarded the ages of the flag and other officers. He knew a time when the utmost activity was requisite on the part of officers in the command of ships, and when a captain could not shut his eyes when in sight of land. He did not think that he had forgotten anything, but, he should be very much surprised, if the House refused to accede to this proposition after what had taken place the other day, when a Motion was brought forward by his hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Kinsale, respecting certain pensions which had been granted to the holders of sinecures which had been abolished. His hon. and learned Friend showed, that four of those Clerks, who held sinecure offices in the Court of Chancery, formerly received between them, 28,000l.. a year. These sinecures, had been very properly abolished, but these persons got retired allowances to the amount of 22,000l. for the period of their lives, and for seven years after their deaths. Another batch of Clerks were to receive between them 46,000l. a-year; but he did not know whether or not this sum was to be paid to them for seven years after their death. He recollected also, the case of the pension of the present Lord Abinger, who held some sinecure office connected with the Court of Exchequer, and he received a large pension, on the ground that the office was a free- hold, and could not, therefore, be abolished, without compensation. This, however, was not the treatment which the Commissioners of the several Dock Yards experienced, when their offices were abolished. He conceived, that these offices should be just as much regarded as freeholds, as that of Lord Abinger, for they were always filled by naval officers of a certain standing, and it was always considered that it was a civil appointment, to be held by them as long as they pleased. He would ask, what had been the treatment of those distinguished officers, Sir Michael Seymour, Admiral Ross, Sir J. Gordon, Captain Burgess, Captain Ashby, Sir T. Briggs, Captain Hornby, and Sir T. Usher? All these officers held patent places, but these were abolished without giving them compensation. Sir Michael Seymour was turned out of his office without any compensation, and he was afterwards sent to the Brazil station for three years. Admiral Ross was sent to the South American station for two years. Sir J. A. Gordon was appointed to Greenwich Hospital, by which he lost his good-service pension, and his half-pay, and all that he had as an equivalent was a house to live in. That officer had gone through services as gallant and distinguished as any, and yet he was treated in this way. Captain Burgess was, also, a Commissioner of Greenwich Hospital, but he had sustained great loss by the treatment he had received. Sir T. Briggs was also turned out of his office, and all that he had received was an appointment to a station for five years. Captain Hornby had been turned out, but had received another appointment; and he might consider himself as a very fortunate man, as he had always been in place since. Sir T. Usher and Captain Ashby had received the same treatment. The Civil Commissioners of the Dock Yards were always allowed to remain in their respective offices as long as they pleased; but here they had not met with the treatment which had been shown to the holders of the sinecure clerkships in Chancery, but they were turned out without compensation. He thought, that as regarded the officers of the Navy, they should be put on the same footing as the Army and other professions. He would not trespass longer on the time of the House, for all that he asked was to take the subject into consideration, and to give only the small sum of 1,000l. per annum. The gallant Officer concluded with moving, that this House recommend that previous to the preparation of the Navy Estimates to be submitted to Parliament in the year 1845, that some plan of retirement for officers in the Navy on the top of the respective lists should be devised, so as to make the Naval service more effective, and to afford the opportunity of rewarding old and meritorious officers.

I shall address myself to that part of the speech of the gallant Officer, and of the proposals made by him, for which the Treasury, as superintending the finances of this country, are responsible, as having a control over the public expenditure, leaving to my hon. Friends near me connected with the Board of Admiralty those technical points which I am not so competent to deal with as they are. But, first, the House will perhaps allow me to thank the gallant Officer for the kind notice he has taken of a son of mine, who obtained his promotion on the very day on which he was by law entitled to apply for it. The hon. and gallant Officer is quite right in saying that he received that promotion without any recommendation from me, and in the absence of any application on my part, but he received it at the express recommendation of the examining officer, Sir T. Hastings, the commander of the Excellent. This kind mention of a young officer by So distinguished a member of his own profession as the hon. and gallant Member opposite, cannot fail to operate as a great excitement to follow that honourable course of which the gallant officer himself has set so brilliant an example. When I stated that I thought this House ought to be on their guard against a combination of naval officers, I meant no reflection whatever upon the naval service, but only to state what I think is an admitted truth, that professional men, naturally enough, take a partial view of that branch of the profession to which they belong. This is equally natural and honourable to their feelings, and I only entreated this House not to be influenced solely by a concurrence of opinion between men differing in politics, who happen to agree in the propriety of awarding some particular advantage to the profession to which they belong. The House, some years since, felt the inconvenience of partial motions made with reference to the several branches of the military and naval service. Questions of promotion and retirement were brought forward in the case of the Army, the Navy, the Ordnance, and so on, and these motions were brought forward by officers who took a very partial and limited view of the profession to which they belonged; and it was against such partial and limited views that I advised this House to exercise circumspection and caution. The late Government, finding that all these questions had an intimate bearing upon each other, and thinking the House of Commons not competent to decide upon that view of the whole matter, which ought to be taken by the most competent authorities, advised the House to appoint a Commission to consider these questions of promotion and retirement, and their connection with others, and their bearing upon the different services; and Her Majesty, by the advice of the late Government, appointed a Commission to inquire into the mode of retirement in practice amongst naval and military officers, the comparative situation of officers in each branch of the service, and to consider what improvements could be made in this respect, with a due regard to economy and the efficacy of the service, and the encouragement of the officers. On that Commission were the Dukes of Wellington and Richmond, the Earl of Minto and Viscount Melville (both of whom had served as First Lords of the Admiralty), Viscount Howick (a son of a First Lord of the Admiralty), Lord Hill, Sir George Kempt, Mr. Labouchere, Sir R. H. Vivian, Sir A. Dixon, Sir H. Hardinge, Sir H. Williams; and of naval officers there were Sir G. Cockburn, Sir C. Adam, and Sir T. Hardy. Many men of the first eminence in the naval service were examined as witnesses before the Commission, amongst whom were Sir E. Codrington, Admiral Griffiths, Commodore Jones, and several others of equal distinction. The immediate subject which has been to-night brought before the House, came distinctly under their consideration— namely, whether it would be of advantage to the service to clear the Retired List of captains of advanced age, and continue the class of officers called yellow admirals? — and the decided opinion of the Commission was, that it would not be good policy. In their Report, the Commissioners say, that it did not occur to them to suggest any other change in the pay and allowances of captains on the Retired List, although they had fully considered the various applications that had been made to them on that subject, for that they did not think that any advantage to the service could be derived from extending the list, beyond mates and commanders, commensurate with the call that it would make upon the revenue of the country. This was the opinion of the Commission after a most rigid investigation of the whole subject, and on that Commission were Lord Minto, Lord Melville, Admiral Adams, and Sir G. Cockburn. Now, after this, I do hope that the House will think it unnecessary to interfere in the matter, by acceding to the Motion of the gallant Officer, but leave it in the hands of Her Majesty's Government, who are not of opinion that it would be politic or judicious to act in any manner, upon such a question at variance with the recommendation of the Commission that had so fully inquired into it. It is not the expense that would make me hesitate, if I thought that the course proposed by the gallant Officer would really benefit the service. It is from a sincere conviction that the measure, if adopted, would not produce the effect which the gallant Officer anticipated from it—namely, clearing the list of captains, that I object to it. I believe it would do no good, except giving the officers the option whether they would retire or not. He presumed the gallant Officer would not make the retirement compulsory. [Sir C. Napier: No, certainly not.] Rear Admiral Griffith said,—

"The present suggested compulsory setting aside of old officers is in opposition to the system of a century and more. It appears to me a breach of engagement, harsh and unjust in its exercise, producing immense painful distress to those who may be so treated, and, as I conclude some additional pay would be given, in point of economy a very insignificant saving."

When the question was brought under the notice of the Treasury, it was expressly stated that the retirement of 100 officers would be of no value whatever. [Sir C. Napier: Try 150.] But then the gallant Officer had said he was afraid the Government would object to the expense. The expense of retiring 100 officers, with the pensions to their widows, would be about 17,000l. A calculation had been made by my right hon. and gallant Friend, that the retirement of 150 captains, in the way he proposed, would entail an expense on the public of 26,000l. What would be the effect of adopting the plan, if the retirement were to be optional? It would be this—that the oldest officers would not accept—and that was the opinion of the gallant Officer. It is quite clear that those on the list of 1808 and 1809, who were looking up to the possession of a flag, would not take the option, because they entertained the hope that the next promotion would give them the rank of admiral. Those who would be likely to retire, were the captains at the bottom of the list, who, despairing of obtaining the rank of admiral, would take the advantage offered to them, and that would be no benefit to the public. That was the intimation conveyed to the Treasury by the Board of Admiralty, who said it was doubtful whether any of the officers at the head of the list—namely, those of 1808 and 1809 would accept the offer. [Sir C. Napier: Certainly not.] It is doubtful whether any of them would accept the offer, save those whose very advanced age or great infirmity forbade them to hope to get their flag, the object of every man's ambition who got a commission in the Navy. It appears to me that it would be an improvident option to offer, because it would be rejected by the old men, at the head of the list, who expect to obtain the distinction which is so highly and justly coveted, whilst it would be accepted by comparatively young men, who, calculating they had little chance within a reasonable period of obtaining the rank of admiral, would place themselves on the retired list of captains. Taking those circumstances into consideration, it appears to the Government that the advantage to be gained by the public in clearing the list would not be commensurate to the expense. If such a step were taken this year, a similar step must be again taken in the course of six or seven years for the purpose of again clearing the list. I trust, therefore, that the House, regardful of the public purse, and considering the opinion of the eminent men who composed the Commission, will not be led by their natural feelings in favour of the Navy to express any opinion, to support the Motion of the gallant Officer, which would be calculated to fetter the Government. It is, I can assure the House, with considerable pain that I feel, with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as guardians of the public purse, the duty that is imposed upon us of resisting demands for which no public advan- tage can be expected as an equivalent. I shall say nothing on the subject of the sale of Commissions; but I think it is best to leave to the Crown the selection of officers from the top of the list for any service that may be required. I know there is great jealousy on the point of seniority, and I think it very necessary to guard against the exercise of power or patronage in any interference with that claim. I believe, on the whole, that it is better to leave the old officers where they are, at the top of the list, for I feel assured, that their removal would not have any effect in clearing it, so as to prevent a repetition of such applications as the present. If I thought, that it really would have that effect, I would not be prevented, by the consideration of 10,000l. or 20,000l. a year, from adopting it; but my sincere belief is, that the proposal will afford no remedy for the evil which has arisen out of a long peace. The House may be sure, that if it shall interfere in the case of officers of the Navy, a similar application will be made on behalf of the Marines and Artillery. For these reasons, I hope the House will have sufficient confidence in Her Majesty's Government to believe that they will act in this, as on all other occasions, with a due regard to the advantage of the service and the interests of the country, and will leave in the hands of the Executive, the entire consideration of a question that involves an expenditure of the public money. I do not think that any good could arise from the adoption of the Motion of the gallant Officer, but that it would be very likely to be productive of evil, and I therefore trust the House will not accede to it.

supported the Motion. It was to be remarked, that whenever any effort was made to vindicate the claims of the Navy, the House was called upon by Government to leave the matter in the hands of the Executive; whereas, with reference to other departments, the Government exhibited no such reluctance to give the House a voice in the matter. The right hon. Baronet said he could see no advantage to the service, from making the proposed Retired List; but this was a view of the case in which the whole profession, he might say, differed from the right hon. Baronet. The present system was in the highest degree calculated to impair the efficiency of our Navy. Men who had acquired a thorough knowledge of their profession were set aside — shelved for twenty years together—their experience rendered perfectly useless—their acquired knowledge allowed to rust, and to be of no avail. He had known instances of those old captains having become so nervous by lying on the shelf so long, that actually they could not go to sleep when sent out again, although the weather might be most calm and fine. He himself, made a captain just before the close of the war, had, in the thirty years that had since elapsed, been enabled only to serve six years and six months; though from various circumstances he had possessed influence superior to that of very many officers of equal or even older standing. On all occasions the Navy was boasted of as the great bulwark of the country; yet on all occasions, when it was sought to do some justice to the men who composed that Navy, they were made an exception to the advantages which were given to the public services. A Retirement List had been accorded to the Marines, on the motion of an hon. Relative of his, not now in the House, in spite of Government; and he did not see why a corresponding concession should not be given in favour of the Navy. The right hon. Baronet very justly spoke of the prospect of obtaining a flag-ship, as being the darling object of all men who entered the service; but what chance had he after his many years of service, of obtaining that darling object, notwithstanding all the advantages he had possessed, beyond other men of equal standing? None at all; or, at all events, not till age had, perhaps, rendered him incapable of performing the duties of the appointment. The right hon. Baronet laid much stress on the Commission referred to. Having himself been in office, he was inclined to think, that in a professional question of this kind, justice was not so likely to be done by men who either were, or who expected to be in office, and who were hampered by that very circumstance, as by officers who were unconnected with power and party, and who were solely influenced by the wish to improve the condition and effectiveness of the profession. He should cordially support the Motion of his gallant Friend; and, sure as he was that the House would, sooner or later, have to attend to the warning which the gallant Officer had given, he thought it would be the best wisdom to lose no time in doing so.

said, that the Commission was exceedingly desirous of strictly inquiring into the whole of this subject, and, after fully considering it, the opinion of the majority on the Commission was, that the proposition of the gallant Officer that night was not one that ought to be adopted, as it was calculated to break in upon the nature of the service. The long list was the consequence of a protracted war, succeeded by a long peace. The war has ended, but the list remained, as the Officers could not longer be employed. The object of the Board of Admiralty was to divide the service as much and as fairly as possible amongst the Officers, as the service required. The question as to the Mates was brought before the Commission, and he believed there were not more than three who had been made before 1835. Let the House look at the advantageous position of Midshipmen now as compared with former times, and also of Lieutenants, many of whom, at the head of the list, had now 7s. instead of 5s. a day, which they had before. He was sorry to hear what the gallant Officer who spoke last said of the weakness of mind of those Officers to whom he alluded, as afraid to go to sleep within sight of land on the coast of Syria. [Captain Berkeley: I did not mention Syria. I said Officers who had lately been at sea.] I thought the gallant Officer alluded to Syria, because the gallant Officer who brought forward this Motion spoke of something of the same sort of nervousness exhibited on the coast of Syria. But, notwithstanding all this, he did not doubt that if fifty or sixty sail of the line were required tomorrow, they could be sent to sea as efficiently served as at any period of our history. He certainly did himself offer a suggestion to the Commission to remove some Officers from the list—but the opinion of the Commission was, that it should be left in the hands of the Government, and of course he did not press it. As to the sale of Commissions, he confessed he did not see any inconvenience that would be likely to arise from it—that was, in merely giving to the Board of Admiralty the power of putting down certain Commissions for sale —because the Officer who got his promotion for service, would see that the man who purchased had been obliged to pay for his promotion. He had himself brought this part of the subject before the Lord High Admiral, and also before the Commission; but his views were not adopted, although he had carried some points in the Commission against the First Lord of the Admiralty. He did not think it was necessary for him to say more upon the subject at present.

said, that the Commission, so much alluded to, would never have been appointed, had it not been for the repeated Motions that were made on the subject, in that House. The right hon. Baronet, who was now going out to India, as Governor General, had fought the battle of the naval officers well on the Commission, and they felt highly indebted to him. The Masters of the Service had been treated with gross neglect, and spoken of, by a Member of the Government, in terms which they felt to be very disparaging to them, on a former occasion. If Ministers granted the necessary documents, the House could prove the truth of the statement, made by a Member of Government, in another House, that the Queen, 110 gun-ship, had been lying, nine-tenths of her time, in Malta Harbour, instead of being at sea, giving young officers an opportunity of exercising themselves in their profession. So with the Fox, a vessel built on a new principle. The qualities of the Fox were not tested; but she was lying in the Shannon, since December, collecting poor-rates, perhaps, or frightening the poor fellows along the banks of the river. Was not this too bad? And let not Government think, that they (the supporters of the Motion) would leave them alone. By no means. They would continue their exertions to remove the evils. With respect to promotions, there was his gallant Friend near him, whose age was fifty-two, and what chance had he (Captain Pechell), who was three years older, of ever changing his situation? And the hon. and gallant Member for Gloucester, fourteen or fifteen years his senior, had given up all hope. They did all in their power, however, to impress on the Admiralty, the necessity of employing vigorous and efficient officers, and Government had partially admitted the justice of the principle, by sending out to China, a young man about whose health no fear need be entertained. He (Captain Pechell) did not say, the present Admiralty Board was worse than others; it was to the evils of the system itself he objected. His late Majesty, when Lord High Admiral, had given universal satisfaction, and it would have been fortunate if His Royal Highness Prince Albert had taken such a position. The hon. and gallant Officer concluded, by calling on the House to support the Motion.

would not attempt to follow the gallant Officer the Member for Brighton, who had travelled from Ireland to Hongkong and back again. But he wished to explain, in reference to a remark made by an hon. and gallant Friend opposite, as to his having seconded a similar Motion on a former occasion, that his reason for doing so was, that he thought some steps ought to be adopted for improving the list and making the service more efficient. He would give an independent vote, but he thought there was a question of prudence involved in this matter—a question whether, by reiterating these Motions, and pressing too much on the Executive, injury instead of good might not be done. He had told his hon. and gallant Friend so in private; and he now told him so in public. He did believe that his hon. and gallant Friend, by pressing the Motion to a division, would be injuring instead of serving the cause they both had in view. He begged to remind the hon. and gallant Member for Brighton that there might be political business, and not merely that of amusing the people of Malta, to account for the Queen being so long in harbour, and there might be other reasons besides those to which the gallant Officer had alluded, why the Fox remained so long in the Shannon; but, he trusted, that the Government would lose no opportunity not only of giving a fair trial to all improvements in the most important science of naval architecture, but also of increasing the experience of our naval officers, particularly those who had joined the service since the peace, in naval tactics, by having small exercising squadrons. The operations with the experimental brigs showed, that improvement was not neglected, and he recommended his gallant Friend not to divide upon the present occasion as he could not vote with him.

felt diffident in addressing the House, after the short experience he had had in Parliament, but as this was a naval subject, he thought he was called on to express his opinion, that the gallant Commodore had made out a case for inquiry, and he should support the Motion. The present condition of the Navy, were it continued, might hereafter be very injurious to the country. It was said, that the subject should be left in the hands of the Executive. He had confidence in the man at the wheel, and had no doubt he would steer the ship safely and well; but when he was told, "Do not speak to the man at the helm," he held it to be the duty of every person on board, when he saw breakers a-head, to point them out. He believed Her Majesty's Government were restrained only by economical considerations, from carrying out the views of the gallant Commodore, and the House of Commons, which took charge of all fiscal questions, ought to investigate the matter. He could not agree in the suggestion of introducing the system of purchase into the Navy; and with respect to the proposal, that they should add 100l. a-year to the first 100 captains on the list, he did not think they would accept it, on the condition with which it was accompanied, because they all hoped to have the honour of their Flag. He would rather extend the increase down to the first 300 names on the list, amongst which were to be found the names of officers who had been fifty and sixty years in the Navy. He thought that their allowance of 260l. a-year was not a fair remuneration for such long services. He should like to see the half-pay of the first class increased to 16s. a-day, and that of the next to 14s. Such a plan would not cause a greater annual outlay than 5,700l., which he had no doubt the public would willingly pay-He entirely agreed in the propriety of giving retiring allowances; but then they should be voluntary, and given only upon application.

said, that the question before them, was one of very great importance; out of an immense list, it was stated that officers enough could scarcely be got for one fleet; for, in consequence of the system which had been adopted, there were a great many men who had been kept from active service so long that they would never be able again to return to active employment at sea; and thus, with such a large Naval Establishment, they had a comparatively small force of officers. The Naval Estimates for this year were six millions and a half, and there was no reason why there should be any inefficiency in any of its departments. It had been stated, by the gallant Admiral opposite (Sir G. Cockburn) that this was not the proper place for such an inquiry. [Sir G. Cockburn said, his observation applied to the promotion of officers.] He was well aware of the opinions that prevailed with some persons as to the expediency of inquiry in this House, as to the promotion of officers; but when, a few years ago, a Commission was appointed to inquire into the promotion in various branches of the Service, it was one which tended to produce very advantageous results. The more immediate cause of the inquiry was the treatment of a brave and deserving body of men, the Royal Marines, but the inquiry was extended to other branches of the Service. He considered, that an inquiry into the subject of the hon. and gallant Admiral's Motion would be of great advantage to the public interests. Out of a list of 683 captains of the Royal Navy, in May 1838, there were 313 who had never, up to that period, served a day after their promotion, and the same system was adopted with respect to other officers. He moved for Returns, two years ago, which were granted; and, if ever a document was of a nature to call for subsequent inquiry, it was the Paper containing those Returns. Something ought to be done, with reference to this subject; and if the Government did not bring forward a plan for improving the state of things which had been so long complained of, it was the duty of some one else to do so, and he was, therefore, obliged to the hon. and gallant Commodore for bringing forward this Motion. He trusted that anything which might be done with reference to the list would not be confined to clearing the list, but that they would inquire how it had become so burthened, and adopt means which would prevent it becoming so burthened again. The promotion in the Navy depended, nearly altogether, on influences which were too political in their character, and he would remind the House that the best bulwarks of the country ought not to be so treated. Those who were affected by this system were a body of men who deserved well of their country—who ventured their lives and their health in defence of it—and he had seen many instances where those men were, after long services, very ill-rewarded, whilst others were rewarded who did not deserve it so well. He had taken a great interest in this subject, for a long time, and he did so, not from any principle of economy, for he thought, that no branch of the public Service deserved more support than the Navy, and he thought it ought to have a fair and liberal support. He therefore repeated that his objections to the present system were not founded on principles of economy; but he thought that it was inexpedient to have, as we have at present, seven captains, and seven lieutenants, to every ship in the Navy. It was as absurd as if any hon. Member in that House kept seven coachmen, and only employed one. The half-pay non-effective List cost the country 1,500,000l. a-year, and many of those officers had rendered very little service to the country. He wished to see the Service weeded, and favouritism and partiality put an end to, or at least checked. He cordially supported the Motion.

said, the hon. Member for Montrose came down to the House under two disadvantages. In the first place he had not heard a considerable part of the preliminary discussion, including the answer of the right hon. Baronet near him to many parts of the speech of the hon. and gallant Commodore who brought forward the Motion; and the second disadvantage which the hon. Member laboured under was, that from his speech he did not appear to be aware of the nature of the Motion of the hon. and gallant Commodore, for his whole speech had been directed only to one particular subject. The question was whether, with a view to remedy an evil the existence of which was admitted by all, the proposed addition of about 25,000l. a year to the public burthens would be accompanied by the advantage of a corresponding relief to the list to which it was proposed to be applied; but there being great differences of opinion on the subject, the question being a very large one, and the prospect of the evil being remedied by the proposed plan being, in his opinion, nearly hopeless, unless done on a much larger scale than is proposed by the gallant Officer, he thought it would be wrong to put the country to a fruitless expense, an expense which he should not grudge to see doubled if it were likely to produce the beneficial effect, but which would leave us after a few years in the same position as we were before. Old Captains, for example, standing high on the list, might not be disposed to take the additional 5s. a day, when, by waiting a few years, they might become Rear Admirals, and you would then be forced, in applying the proposed plan, to go down the list till you come to Officers whose length of service would not warrant the advantage you proposed to give them, so that you would have the old officers or the active, or the comparatively young ones on the retired list. Unless the feeling of the profession was in favour of any proposed plan, the Admiralty would find themselves unable to carry it out satisfactorily. Lord Howe's administration showed that, for he was nearly driven out of office by the unpopularity created by his having taken some officers for promotion to their flag by selection and not by seniority. And, with regard to hon. and gallant Officers who were in that House, he must observe that no plan was ever proposed by one, that it did not meet with immediate opposition from some of the others. He believed that at the end of a few years, if this plan as now proposed were adopted, they would find themselves just where they were, except, perhaps, that Captains of sixty-two or sixty-three years of age would be getting the proposed benefit instead of Captains sixty-five years old. But, above all, he thought that a question of the kind ought to be left to the Government to decide on, that they might choose a time, when, by adapting the plan to obvious evils, and securing the full advantage that could be derived from it, the country would be the more reconciled to the sacrifices to be made. He regretted that the Motion had been brought forward, and he should feel it his duty to vote against it, if the hon. and gallant Officer did not accede to the advice he had received to withdraw it.

could not give his support to the Motion, because it was a direct interference with the Executive Government, and because it was a wild and inconsiderate scheme. Great credit was due to the present Government for the recent appointments which they had made, and the objection to them resolved itself into an attack on their appointment of Admiral Owen to the Mediterranean Fleet. But he could bear testimony to the unimpaired intellect and vigour of that gallant Admiral, and he wished the country might never have a worse servant.

replied, as for the Commission, they had voted one thing to-day, and another thing on the morrow, just as the House had recently done on the factory question. It was a "thank-you-for-nothing" sort of affair. What was a mere grant of 6d. a-day to commanders, fifty of whom received what it was really too bad to offer them? There was not much force in the authority of the two civil First Lords appealed to, Lords Melville and Minto, particularly as Sir J. Graham had thought differently on the subject. As for the argument, that" the change would do no good," he protested against it. Why, a large proportion of those officers on the list were certain they never could arrive at promotion, and would gladly accept the pension. Who, among them, would not, who had attained the age of sixty, and was not within 100 of the top of a list of 1,800? The small chance of promotion not only produced secessions to the merchant service, but great discouragement to youngsters entering the Navy, on account of the growling and grumbling of the seniors. The result of the present system, continued Sir Charles, is, that you have a parcel of old admirals, perhaps some of whom could hardly put to sea without carrying away their bowsprits. It's absurd to imagine, that shrivelled old officers can command at sea, as they did when younger and stronger. I know, that many commanders of the present day 'would not dare to shut their eyes half the night; and I have heard it said, that some can't see the shore when they are very near it. I can say for myself, I, perhaps, have as good nerves as most men; but I declare I am not the same man at sea now, as I was thirty or twenty years ago. Who could be? It's all very well, for Lords and Secretaries of the Admiralty to pretend that this is not so; but it is human nature, and it must be. With one in fifty it may not be so; but, assuredly it is with the vast majority of men. I hope the gallant Officer will not be so obstinate as to say, " Because the Commodore keeps bringing this subject forward, I won't take it up." Now, for the noble Lord (Lord Ingestre), whom I taunted as tongue-tied. Why, didn't he second me last year? and now he won't vote for me! I suppose, on account of a reprimand from his chief, which I would not have taken so easily. I don't know how it is, but changes do happen in this House rather queerly. Men voting today this way, and to-morrow that. On the present occasion, the officials have told us so exactly the same story, that they must have, surely, got it up together. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government must have said to the naval Lord, "You must say so and so; stick to me like wax," and the Secretary and he seemed to have turned and twisted together, to see who could "do it" strongest. But I know if the right hon. Baronet were to unseal their lips, they and all the rest of the naval authorities would be for the proposition. The right hon. Gentlemen say, "Oh! the effect would be to give the old officers at the top of the list promotion, and pension off the young ones." This was, of course, cheered; but I will expose it. True, the promotion of the first two or three, at the top of the list, might do the Service no good; but, after that, the acceptance of the retirement by some 150 would remove so many —young men?—no, but men of sixty years of age—pretty youngsters they! —and would not that be a benefit? Let but the thing be tried, and the advantage will soon appear.

wished to explain. He stated, the estimate of the expense of the retiring allowance, for 100 officers had been nearly 18,000l.; but it had been also stated that no advantage could arise, from the pensioning of a less number than 150, the cost of which would be 26,000l. If the House sanctioned this, it would exhibit itself less economical than the Government.

The House divided:—Ayes 28; Noes 71: Majority 43.

House adjourned, at ten o'clock.