SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he must decline to accede to the proposal. REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE QUESTION. MR. BANKS STANHOPE said, he wished to put a Question to Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer relating to the omission of Parts of Lindsey from the Schedule of the Reform Bill owing to a typographical error, and would beg to ask, Whether it would be supplied in Committee? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he had received a communication from his hon. Friend on this subject, pointing out the inaccuracy, with which he had not been previously acquainted. Perhaps the best explanation he could give would be to produce the original passage as sent to the printer on the authority of a gentleman known by the House, and whose word would be at once taken as a voucher for the truth of the statement-he meant Mr.Grieve, who draughted the Bill. There would be no objection to make the correction when an opportunity offered. give rise to a discussion which would last | bring it forward; and nothing would have three or four hours, it would not be better induced me to do it had I not felt that if hon. Members were saved the trouble of it is a matter which affects so vitally attending, by one day next week being the best interests of the service, and is named for bringing the subject before the one which strikes at the root of all disHouse? cipline, that having been myself a naval officer I thought that I should not be doing my duty were I to allow a promotion of so unusual and unprecedented a character, which has justly caused so much discontent throughout the service, to pass by unnoticed and unchallenged. It will be, Sir, in the recollection of the House, that about two weeks ago I asked the late First Lord of the Admiralty a Question relating to this matter. I asked him if it was true that a lieutenant, whose commission as lieutenant dated from May 22, 1861, had been promoted over the heads of 370 of his seniors; and, if so, what special grounds could be assigned for so unusual a proceeding? It is, Sir, because the answer I then received was far from satisfactory, and tended rather to increase the glaring anomalies of this promotion, and showed on what a dangerous and slippery basis Admiralty promotions rest, that I have founded this Motion. The right hon. Baronet then informed me that it was quite true this promotion had taken place; but that the officer referred to was of unimpeachable character and professional reputation, and had served from five to six years at sea. Now, Sir, I have no wish either to impeach this officer's professional character or reputation, more especially so as I believe him from personal knowledge to be a very good officer, nor do I wish to blame him in the slightest degree; but what I want to point out to the House is this, that he had no special qualification whatever to justify his promotion over so many of his seniors, nor had he ever been placed in any position in which he could have shown that he had served from five to six years any. How the First Lord could have stated at sea, I am totally at a loss to conceive; as by the fairest calculation, giving him the benefit of a few doubtful days, I find that at the outside he could only have served at sea for the brief space of four years and one month. I am sure that the right hon. Baronet had no wish to mislead or give a wrong impression to the House, and that what he then stated he firmly believed, and that it must have been based on some eroneous information he had received. I sincerely trust that if he replies to this Motion he will also be able SUPPLY. Order for Committee read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair." NAVY PROMOTION.-RESOLUTION. MR. HANBURY-TRACY, who had given notice to call the attention of the House to one of the recent promotions made by the present Board of Admiralty; and to move "That the promotion by the First Lord of the Admiralty of a junior Lieutenant in the Navy, without any special or distinguished service, over the heads of hundreds of meritorious Lieutenants senior to him in the Service, is prejudicial to the public interest," said: I must claim the kind indulgence of the House, feeling that I am touching on rather delicate ground, and that this subject bears somewhat of an invidious and personal a character. I can only say that nobody regrets more than I do the necessity which compels me to to state that he was labouring under a wrong impression when he made this promotion, and had at that time no idea of what a glaring injustice he was perpetrating. Perhaps, Sir, before I go further, I had better state to the House on what grounds I consider this promotion most unfair and unjust. I find, Sir, that this officer, having no special qualification whatever, has been promoted over the heads of 350 lieutenants who had served at sea for a longer period than he had, and all of whom had every right to expect to be made commanders before him; that he has been promoted over 128 first lieutenants of ships in commission; over sixty gunnery lieutenants; over forty lieutenants in command of vessels; over two lieutenants who had received the Beaufort testimonial for their special qualifications on passing at the naval college; over the senior lieutenants of the ten different stations; and lastly, over a very large number of officers who have been specially recommended for their promotion by their admirals and captains. I hope that this statement, showing so clearly what a monstrous and glaring injustice has been done, is of itself a sufficient excuse for my having brought it forward. The figures which I have given I believe to be strictly accurate; and in order to render them so, I have gone most carefully over each name on the Navy List, and deducted all those who, from age and other causes, could not reasonably expect their promotion, and could not be termed effective officers. The Duke of Somerset, in his evidence before the Select Committee on Naval Promotion and Retirement in 1963, stated that he considered the dead-weight of the lieutenants' list to be about 100, and as I have deducted no less than 106, I hope the right hon. Baronet will not think that I have taken any unfair advantage of him. In the answer to my question the right hon. Baronet went on to say that it was for the benefit of the service to promote a certain number of young officers, and that promotions in the navy always are, and always must be, by selection. Now, Sir, I entirely agree with him that it is most beneficial to the service that young officers should be promoted, and young blood be occasionally infused into the service; but I apprehend that nobody can deny that if young officers are selected and promoted over the heads of so many of their seniors, it should be only for recognised ability and merit, and not for personal feeling and political in fluence. Promotion by selection has been so well described in the Report of the Select Committee on Navy, Army, and Ordnance Estimates in 1848, that I will, with the permission of the House, read a short extract from it "This power of selection is, indeed, a trust which must be exercised with justice and discrimination. The duty is invidious; but the faithful performance of it will ensure the constant promotion of officers in the prime of life to the highest rank in their profession. The public will be the gainers; great advantage will still be given to seniority; no injustice will be done if good service and approved merit be the rules reward will be held out to signal gallantry and to which shall guide the selection, and the greatest exemplary conduct." I take it, Sir, that there can be no doubt that promotion by selection ought and must be based on seniority, except in cases of special merit and recognised ability. selection, the floodgates are at once open If you merely say that promotion is by to all manner of interest and jobbery. Admiral Elliot, in his evidence before the Select Committee, showed very clearly tion provided it is for conspicuous ability that the service never complains of selec and merit. "I think that the service would admit at once coming forward; and if only a portion of the the great advantage of having some young officers promotions was left to selection, I do not think that any branch of the service would complain, provided that the selections were for recognised ability and merit.” I hope it will not be thought that I am in favour of a pure seniority system; for, on the contrary, so strong am I in favour of promotion by selection based on seniority that, instead of wishing it done away with, I am inclined to go rather to the other extreme; and I do not think sufficient officers are promoted by selection for their special abilities and zealous conduct. The great advantages of such a system none who have seen the working of it can deny; and, Sir, it is one of the happiest contrasts that I know of to witness the difference displayed by our first and gunnery lieutenant in zeal and energy and that shown by officers of foreign navies, in which the service is based on the pure seniority system. On the one hand officers feel, or rather hope, that the eye of the Admiralty is upon them, and that their promotion is, to a great extent, dependant on their own individual exertion and energy; whilst, on the other hand, on the pure seniority system they know that they are certain of their promotion with one out any special exertion on their part, and by distributing his patronage and promo- "XII. Your Committee have already stated that the Naval Officers are generally in favour of the principle of selection as applicable to the promotion of Lieutenants to be Commanders, and Commanders to be Captains. The Committee think that the system as worked by the Adiniralty is fair. It was thus described by the Duke of Somerset: With regard to promotions made at the Admiralty, I go over the lists with the ser vices of the officers; and I see also what the recommendations of the officers in command of the different stations have been; I very often receive a private letter from the Admirals in command, pointing out such and such officers as being very efficient and zealous, and who are deserving of good of the service. We then take an opportupromotion, and whose promotion would be for the nity to put them, if we can, into the next batch; but, at the same time, we take them, to a certain extent, from each station, so that the officers who are serving at a distance (serving, perhaps, in the Pacific) may not see the promo tion going to some other station, and not getting themselves a little share of it. We try to divide the promotions between the different sta tions.' The Duke of Somerset has further detaken to prevent officers from being unduly passed scribed in his evidence, the precautions now over While this practice continues, it may reasonably be expected that deserving officers will not be neglected, and distinguished merit will meet with its reward. Your Committee can alteration in the system of selection as now ap see no reason, therefore, for recommending an plied to the lower ranks; and, when well administered, your Committee entirely agree with the Report of the Commissioners on Naval and Mi litary Inquiry, that it offers the best security which could be desired for reinforcing and reanimating the Navy to any extent which the circumstances of the country might, on an emer I have endeavoured to show to the House that this system of fairness and impartiality on which the Committee relied has broken down, and I would now ask, Sir, if in the opinion of the House Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That " to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "the promotion by the First Lord of the Admiralty of a junior Lieutenant in the Navy without any special or distinguished service, over the heads of hundreds of meritorious Lieutenants senior to him in the Service, is prejudicial to the public interest,”—(Mr. Hanbury-Tracy,) instead thereof. Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." some alteration should not be made, or, at any rate, some protest be entered against such an unhappy state of things. In the French navy there is a Conseil d'Avancement, whose duty it is, under certain rules, which are well established, to recommend officers for promotion; but I fear until a radical change is made in the constitution of the Admiralty, and permanent Heads of Departments are appointed, it would be useless to adopt this plan. The right hon. Baronet said the other night, that this promotion was one of a batch of five, and that he was unwilling to give an expla- SIR JOHN PAKINGTON: Sir, the nation about a single one without giving hon. Gentleman having thought it his duty his reasons for the whole of these promo- to follow up the Question he asked on a tions. Sir, I believe that four of these former evening by a proceeding of a more promotions were very fair and good pro- formal character, I have to say that I am motions; but is it any reason that because perfectly willing to meet it. I am bound a judge had made four just decisions, to accept, and I do accept, the statement that he should make one unjust one? The just made by the hon. Gentleman-that he right hon. Baronet would have us believe has not brought this Question forward in that four blacks make one white. I a party spirit, or with a factious motive. hope the House will not be deceived by a I am further bound to believe that the doctrine so new and unprecedented, and hon. Gentleman is influenced solely and that they will remember that it is only entirely by patriotic zeal for the interest about one of these promotions that I take. of the naval service. Assuming that to I am informed that it is intended to justify be the case, I am only sorry the patriotic this promotion on the ground that a simi- zeal of the hon. Gentleman did not equally lar one was made by the Duke of Somer- influence him a very short time ago. The set. Sir, I will now say that the case charge involved in this case is that I have they refer to was under totally different promoted a lieutenant of five years and circumstances, and was an act of justice eight months' service to the rank of comto an officer who was suffering from an mander, that lieutenant being-I do not Admiralty order which unintentionally know whether this is a part of the charge had a retrospective action. But, Sir, in a son of the Earl of Hardwicke. [Mr. no case can it be shown that, even if this HANBURY-TRACY: I did not mention names.] had been bad, that it was any excuse for Well, that is an omission which I think I its being renewed. I will not, Sir, any ought to supply. I have to call the atmore take up the time of the House; but tention of the House and the hon. Gentlewill only say that I trust the House, and man to these facts:-The service of Lieuthe right hon. Baronet, will not think that tenant Yorke, as the hon. Gentleman has I have brought this forward in any party told us, was five years and eight months. or factious spirit, or with any ill will to the The Duke of Somerset, when First Lord right hon. Baronet. I cannot believe that of the Admiralty, promoted a son of Sir so good an administrator could have been James Graham from the rank of lieutenant guilty of so flagrant an act of injustice if to that of commander on five years and he had known at the time the real state two months' service. He promoted a son of the case. I sincerely trust that the right of Sir Charles Wood, now Lord Halifax, hon. Baronet will be able to show that from the rank of lieutenant to that of this was really the state of the case, and commander, on five years and two months' that he had no intention of bringing back service. He promoted Lieutenant Fitzthe melancholy reminiscences of former clarence, son of the Earl of Munster, from days, when personal and political influenee the rank of lieutenant to that of commanheld such a withering sway over true der, on four years and eleven months' serability and zeal. I have only to thank vice. Therefore, whatever may have been the House for the kindness with which the iniquity of my promotion of Lieutenant they have heard me. Yorke, in every possible respect those three promotions of the Duke of Somerset are worse. The services of the gentlemen pro Will moted were shorter; and those lieutenants | been brought forward for animadversion. had no peculiar distinction beyond that The hon. Gentleman alluded to other prowhich is a common one. I believe in the motions which I had made on the same cases of Lieutenant Wood and Lieutenant day when I promoted Lieutenant Yorke ; Graham-I know nothing of Lieutenant and he said that four honest promotions Fitzclarence-the officers were gentlemen could not counterbalance this one. of unexceptionable character and good ser- the House allow me to mention the cirvice. But, if the promotion of Lieutenant cumstances. I was called on to promote Yorke be-as the hon. Gentleman says- four lieutenants? As a young officer of good entirely unjust and unwarrantable, I wish character I promoted Lieutenant Yorke, to know why the promotions of those three but my next promotion was Lieutenant officers, who had not seen such long ser- Fitzmaurice, with whom I had no acvice, was not also entirely unjust and un- quaintance. I am not aware that I ever warrantable? Sir, do not let me be mis- saw him in my life; but he had been setaken. I do not complain that no Mem- lected for promotion by the Duke of ber of this side of the House should have Somerset. I believe he was deserving of risen to object to the promotions of the it; but owing to the change of Governson of Sir James Graham and the son of ment, his promotion did not take place, Sir Charles Wood. Provided that their and I thought it would be a great hardship characters were good and their services if he were deprived of it by that circumhonourable, as I believe to have been the stance. As to the other three gentlemen, case, I think it was desirable that young I do not know that I can recollect their blood should have been introduced into names or where they came from; but I the higher ranks of the navy, and, ac- dived into the records of the Admiralty, cordingly, that young officers should have and found men of the highest standing been promoted. I am not the man to say and reputation. All of them had at least that the long public services of Sir Charles ten or eleven years' service, and I do not Wood and Sir James Graham should have believe that any officer in the navy will been disregarded; neither do I wish to say that there could have been better or make the least attack on those promotions. fairer promotions. Since then I have had The hon. Gentleman has paid a tribute to the honour of making three or four more the spirit in which the Duke of Somerset promotions, and I think the hon. Gentleman conducted his promotions. I believe, will exert himself in vain to find fault notwithstanding the cases which I have with them. In the terms of his notice, mentioned to the House, the noble Duke the hon. Gentleman states that the promowas guided by what he considered to be tion of Lieutenant Yorke was made over the right principle. I never heard the the heads of hundreds of meritorious Duke of Somerset's promotions complained officers seniors to him in the service. So of but on one ground-namely, that he did was the promotion of Lieutenant Graham; not make a sufficient number of promotions so was the promotion of Lieutenant Wood; of this kind. The fault I have found with so was the promotion of Lieutenant Fitzhis promotions was that in promoting lieu- clarence. But that statement of itself is tenants he was guided more by the prin- not what I complain of. What I complain ciple of seniority in the service than the of is that the hon. Gentleman, who was a interest of the navy demanded. I will naval officer, and knows how these things are not appeal to gallant Gentlemen behind regulated [A laugh], should use language me, because, from the turn this case has calculated to lead to an erroneous imprestaken, I feel that what they might say sion. I think hon. Gentlemen will do better might be attributed to party feeling; but if they restrain their mirth till they hear I see a gallant Admiral on the other side what I am about to say. The public are (Admiral Erskine), and I ask him whether not aware of the fact, but the hon. Genit is not perfectly true that young blood tleman is aware of the fact, that in every should be introduced into the higher ranks one of those cases of promotion numbers of the navy. Gentlemen are treading of meritorious lieutenants must be passed on dangerous ground when they are over. In the case of those three officers undertaking to draw a distinction be- whom I selected for their service and their tween one young officer of good charac-merits, and to whose selection the hon. ter and another; and I think I have Gentleman makes no objection, a number reason to complain of the manner in which of meritorious officers were passed over. this promotion of Lieutenant Yorke has The state of the navy is such-the stag |