He next came to the employment of officers, a point of considerable import bound to set its face. The hon. member went on with a large list of instances, in which officers had been needlessly pro-ance when coupled with that of promomoted to the rank of captain since the tion. If the rule for promotion upon any peace, and unfairly promoted, as regarded extraordinary occasion-the rule, for inthe claims of their fellows. He gave par- stance, observed at his Majesty's Coronaticular examples of supersession, in the tion, had been to select officers according case of captain Gambier of the Dauntless, to their seniority in the service, he should But the seniority who had been a midshipman at the close have been content. of the war, and whose first lieutenant, which had led to promotion in that inMr. S. Jervois, was an elder lieutenant stance, turned out to be seniority as to by five years than himself; the case of employment in the time of peace, and not captain Maclean, of the Blossom, whose as to employment in the time of war. first lieutenant, W. G. Agar, had been When it was stated by the admiralty, in 17 years a lieutenant; and the case of answer to officers applications, that attencaptain, the hon. F. Spencer, now com-tion would be paid in all the coronation manding the Creole, and having two lieutenants under him, Mr. T. Phipps and Mr. W. Robertson, both of them lieutenants for years before their captain had gone to sea. Let the lords of the admiralty consider the mischief which these unfair promotions did to the service. Let them look at the four officers-lord Thynne, and Messrs. Spencer, Gambier, and Maclean, who had received three promotions-lieutenants, commanders, and post-captains, since the peace-and judge of the feelings of the old and meritorious officers over whose heads those gentlemen had passed. The others of the 40 cases which he had selected were of the same description, in all of them great supersession, though in different degrees. There were, also, 51 commanders, who had obtained two commissions since April 1814, and who were promoted over the heads of hundreds of their seniors. Some of them superseded 3,600 lieutenants, and all of them upwards of 2,200!!! [hear]. He stated these facts from documents with which, in conformity with the order of that House, the admiralty had laid upon the table. He had no reason to complain of any reluctance on their part to furnish the returns for his motion. It was one in which the public interest was much excited, and they had acted wisely in affording the information asked for. He had no party feelings on the subject-he had no personal objects through disappointment to gratify; as he had not a relation connected with the Navy. (An hon. friend near him suggested, that if he had such a connexion, he would not probably take his present course [a laugh].) He felt that it would make no difference with him, and it was known to his friends, that he had done so in another branch of the service where he had a relation. promotions, to seniority and service, lieutenants of 10 or 17 years standing, and the greater part of that time a service in war, had naturally expected to be made commanders. But the admiralty afterwards said,-"You shall be selected with reference to the length of your service during the peace, and not according to your service during the war." Whether that rule was just or not he did not now inquire, but supposing the admiralty to have previously made up their minds, that they would promote at the Coronation those officers whose length of employment during the peace was greatest, how easy was it for them, by previous arrangement of that peace employment, to place the claim for promotion in whomsoever they pleased. He was aware that family and parliamentary interest might be expected to have a certain weight; but, looking back to the list which he held in his hand of 51 lieutenants made commanders, he could not but think that the effect of that influence was much too great. As a specimen of the promotion at the Coronation, he referred to the list of commanders then made post captains. They were➡ Date of Commis- Officers passed over. Sea Service. in peace. 4 —10 - 3 0 3 8 J.Gore............May, 1808 125 3 ys. 3 mths. - 3 Date of Commission. June 23, 1794 Nov. 5, 1794 April 27, 1801 April 29, 1802 Jan. 12, 1805 Sept. 25, 1806 May 6, 1807 Dec. 16, 1807 Aug. 29, 1808 Oct. 3, 1809 May 2, 1810 Feb. 12, 1811 May 3, 1811 ... ... • .... ....... T. L. R. Laugharne⚫ J. H. Garrety He would ask again, if such a system was not calculated to discourage every man who served his country, much more those who had bled in her service; and who naturally looked forward to some of the distinctions of their professions? Again, with respect to the employment, he had made out a list of the 57 commanders, the total number now employed in the navy. Five were employed upon survey; but of the remaining 52, how many would the House suppose were old officers who had served in time of war; and how many of them officers made since the peace? Half and half, as regarded the numbers, would perhaps be the general idea. No such thing. Of the 52 commanders now employed, of whom he spoke, 6 only had been made before the year 1813-that was during the active period of the war; all the rest had been promoted subsequent to the year 1814 in time of peace.-Was not such proceedings calculated to discourage and to disgust officers even the most attached to the naval service, and eventually to impair and destroy its efficiency? It might be said, as it had already been said, that the old officers did not wish to be employed. He would meet that argument, if it was used, by saying that he knew to the contrary. He had made out a list of 98 lieutenants (now serving under new-made captains), older sailors and better entitled to promotion by their services than the men who commanded them. Every one of that number had been upwards of 10 years lieutenants, and some upwards of 20 years -From that number of old officers the promotions might have been made! In looking to the advancement and employment of officers who had seen long service, it occurred to him that many of the midshipmen who had served during the war were placed in a very hard situation. After the promotion of 1,000 midshipmen, VOL. IX. in 1814, which was to meet all claim for services in time of war of that class, it had been said, indeed, that no further promotions were to take place; but still there had been an understanding, that such midshipmen as should still continue in the service, would have the chance of advancement in preference to new claimants. This promise, however, as far as it could be called a promise, had not been fulfilled in good faith. On the 1st of January, 1816, there were 1,509 passed midshipmen, and of that number only 188 had been up to this date, promoted to be lieutenants, and 168 of those who were in the service in 1816, still remained in the service as midshipmen! He had found on board the flag ship at Portsmouth in the month of March, of the present year, 10 midshipmen whose united periods of service amounted to no less than 142 years [Hear, hear.] Every one of these were young men of exemplary character; and the cases of some of them were well known to many members of the House. One had been fifteen years in the service, and he was happy to learn this day, that he was about to be employed in the Isis. He trusted he was at length in the way of promotion. The next on the list, Mr. H. S. Burmston had been also 15 years a midshipman. His claims were numerous. He had been in several actions; had distinguished himself at Algiers; had been thanked for meritorious services by the king of Holland; and had received a medal from the Humane Society, for having saved a seaman from drowning. He had no acquaintance or connexion with any of them; but having accidentally learned the singular fact of such a number of midshipmen of such long standing, having been on board one ship, he felt extremely solicitous to be informed of the particular history of each, which he then had in his hand, but would not take up the time of the House in stating more of them. If such was the illustration which one ship gave, as to the hardship of the old midshipmen, what must be the state of the case when the whole service was taken into account. He hoped, however, that in charity such an example was not very com, mon. Turning from the meritorious, but the neglected, to the fortunate young men, he found the names of 10 midshipmen promoted to be lieutenants immediately after they had served their time; and whose united service as midshipmen did not amount to 60 years, including the 4 A time at the Naval College, and those, all years of service, during the peace. Amongst these 10 midshipmen so promoted, was the name of one Mr. Purvis, whose name was not yet published in the Navy List. That practice, he believed, was a recent but not uncommon one. With the view of keeping secret such pronotions, an interval of 3 months took place between the promotion and the period of making it known to the public. It came within his knowledge, that an officer had received the communication of his promotion in December, while no insertion of it was made in the official list until the April following. There were three of these midshipmen promoted, on the ground of having attended the king to Scotland. One of these, however, (Mr. Seymour) did not accompany the king, though that was the reason assigned for his promotion. He should not trouble the House with giving the names of all the other numerous fortunate midshipmen, who, in time of peace had been promoted nearly as soon as they had passed their time; but there were some names which he felt it his duty to mention, viz:-Hope Johnstone, hon. G. Ryder, Henry Dundas, Chas. J. Hope Johnstone, W. F. Martin, A. Fitzclarence, hon. R. S. Dundas, G. J. Hope Johnstone (three promotions in one family rather a little too much), H. M. Blackwood, Chas. Talbot, Wm. Pitt Canning, E. Wodehouse, H. B. Martin, &c. &c. Did not the whole of these arrangements shew overwhelming influence? Did they not prove that a man's interest had more share than his length of service, or his merits, in his advancement? Let this be admitted to him-and to deny it would hardly be possible-and, as to argument, he should be satisfied; he had done sufficient, if he had proved to the House, that the public was put to great expense, by the promotion of young and inexperienced men of family, whilst young men of highly meritorious and long public services were neglected [Hear]. Promotion-and he would maintain the fact to be so-was as unfairly as it was extravagantly distributed. If it were yielded to him that these promotions took place chiefly by interest and not by merit; he asked no more, that was all he wished at present to substantiate. He left the conclusion to every hon. member, whether the satisfaction of the officers, and the good of the service were likely to be promoted by such a system, particularly when the | House was informed that there were at this moment employed afloat 98 lieutenants of from 10 to 23 years service, serving under captains, the majority of whom never served in time of war. He then complained, that the admiralty who considered promotions necessary did not act on the same principle towards the royal marines and pursers. He believed there was no man who knew the royal marines, but would concur in praise of their services, as not inferior to that of naval officers; and yet, what was the treatment the marine officers met with? The royal marine corps in January, 1816, consisted of 6,949 officers and men. It was now 8,494; making an increase of 1,545 men in seven years. The navy had not been increased, and yet the number of promotions of officers in the marines, which had been increased, bore no proportion to those in the navy. The promotion of lieutenants, captains, and majors together only amounted to 37 steps in the 7 years of peace. There had been 5 first commissions; 11 lieutenants made captains; 11 captains majors; 10 majors to lieutenant-colonels; in all 37 steps among nearly 1,000 officers-while there had been 960 steps in the navy, and only 400 or 500 officers employed at one time.The disproportion and injustice were here manifest. The question was, why this difference existed? It was clear that the promotions in the navy and marine service were not sanctioned by any principle of equal justice. And the true reason was, that the marines had no connections in that House; they had no borough influence, they were not supported by an alliance with great families, and therefore their chances of promotion were so very few [hear!]. It ought not to be forgot that the very distinguished loyalty of the royal marines, induced the government to change their facings to royal blue? The case of the marines supported completely his charge of influence. The number of marine officers brought from half pay in 6 years had been 210, and only five new commissions had been given. In the navy 513 new commissions had been given! The fair principle of promotion which he contended ought to be adopted in the navy, had been recognized by a regulation which had been passed with respect to pursers in 1814, in which it was ordered, "that with the view of preventing the improvident. and unnecessary increase of pursers, no person should be warranted for that situation until the number should be reduced to the number of ships on the list of the royal navy, exclusive of the ships building." It was his (Mr. Hume's) opinion, that some such rule should be laid down relative to the officers of the navy, that there might be no more officers than would be sufficient to officer all the ships that we had either afloat, in ordinary, or building. A proof of the advantage of that regulation was, that in 1816, there were 950 pursers, and there had been, in consequence of the regulation alluded to, but sixteen promotions of pursers in seven years, and these had been made chiefly on foreign service; there were now only 747 pursers, so that the number was at present reduced 203 below that of 1816; and if the sixteen promotions abroad were deducted, it would make 219 actual decrease in the 7 years-That circumstance showed that a proper regulation for stopping unnecessary promotion had produced the best effect in two branches, the marine officers and pursers, and the same rule ought in justice to the public to be acted on with naval officers. On all these grounds he thought the House was bound to institute an inquiry-He concluded by moving the following resolutions : 1. That it appears, by returns to this House, that there were 3,994 lieutenants, 813 commanders, and 851 post-captains, on the list of the royal navy, in January 1816, and that, notwithstanding so great a number of officers on the list, there has been, between 1st January 1816 and the 8th of January 1823, an additional number of 860 promotions (exclusive of postcaptains to be admirals), viz. of 513 midshipmen to be lieutenants, of 222 lieuten ants to be commanders, and of 125 commanders to be post-captains: and that although peace has existed for seven years, there were on the 8th January 1823, 3,720 lieutenants, 814 commanders, and, 829 post-captains on the list of the royal navy; a number more than sufficient to officer a fleet of twice the number of ships of every description in the british navy, if they were all at sea at the same time. 2"That there are 814 commanders on the list of the royal navy, and 57 of them now on full pay, of whom only 7 were promoted during the last ten years of active warfare (from 1803 to 1813), and 50 who have been promoted since June 1814, the termination of the war in Europe. 3" That many of the promotions have, been made in the royal navy without due regard either to the length of service, to the merit of the midshipmen and officers, or to the efficiency and advantage of the navy, and that the expense of the halfpay of the officers of the navy, necessarily great after a long war, has been thereby greatly and unnecessarily increased to the country. 4" That there were 6,949 officers and men in the corps of royal marines in January 1816, and 8,494 in January 1823, being an increase of that corps of 1,545 men and officers in seven years; but there were only 5 first commissions granted, and 32 promotions to higher rank, in that period. 5" That there were 950 pursers on the list of the royal navy in January 1816, and 747 in January 1823, showing a decrease of 203 in the seven years, exclusive of 16 pursers added to the list in that time. 6"That an humble address be therefore presented to his majesty, that he will be graciously pleased to direct an inquiry to be made into the manner in which the right hon. the lords of the admiralty have exercised their power, both as regards the placing on full pay those officers already on the list, and the promotion of the several officers to higher rank in the navy, since the peace in 1815." Sir G. Cockburn said, that the hon. member, while he stated himself to be a friend to the navy, had advocated principles which would be destructive to the service which he affected to uphold. He was sure that any one who had paid attention to the means by which the glory of the British navy had been achieved, would be convinced that the principles laid down by the hon. member would, if they had been acted upon hitherto, never have allowed it to have attained its present high and splendid pre-eminence. The hon. member had set out with highsounding calculations, but the number of abuses which he had been able to allege was very small. He had laid great stress on the numbers promoted by interest and family connexions; but he (sir G. C.) considered it of great moment that persons of rank and importance in the country should be induced to enter the service. When persons, born to every advantage that society could afford, chose to abandon the comforts of which they were in possession, to fag with others upon the seas, in the service of their hon. member seemed to be of opinion, country, they were entitled to peculiar that with the end of the war, there ought consideration. He allowed that a quantum to have been generally an end of promoof promotion ought always to be assigned tion. But what did he think that such a exclusively to merit; but he was con- war which was eminently a navalwar, could vinced the country would not grumble at have closed without leaving great claims the elevation of a certain number of men upon the gratitude of the country? Those of that class to which the country must claims were indeed constantly diminishing look for its safety, and the House for its on account of vacancies by death, and by defence. He believed neither the navy those who left the service; and if some nor the public could be at all angry to young men were not brought in, what see such men get forward. He would would become of the navy in the event of allude to the case of lord Henry Frederick a new war?-The hon. member had found Thynne, which was one of those upon fault with the coronation promotion. But which the imputation of the hon. member what was the fact? There were no midhad been thrown. The fact, however, shipmen promoted then, but such as had was, that his name stood at the bottom of passed in 1813, and the oldest commander a list of seven officers who were made on every station was promoted; the because they were oldest commanders on youngest of whom was made either in stations abroad, thus, seven were pro- 1811 or 1812. The lieutenants who were moted for merit to one for interest. But, selected were those who had been emeven in respect of the promotions for in-ployed for the last eight years. There terest, there was a law which prescribed was an immense number, indeed, emwhat service an officer should have under-ployed during the war; but many of those gone; and, if he were the king's son, it had since entered into other service, or was necessary that he should perform it. gone out in merchant vessels. ThereThat law required, that he should be six fore, the admiralty had picked out for years a midshipman before he could be promotion all who had been employed promoted. And surely, when a person for the last eight years, as being within of rank gave up the comforts of life, and their reach. There was no favour. The consented to fag for six years, he had earned oldest had been made in 1794, and the his commission, when given him, with fair- youngest, he believed, in 1806. He ness. But the young nobleman to whom could inform the hon. member, that there he alluded had served some time as a had once been a promotion on his prinlieutenant in the Mediterranean.-[Here ciple. It was a jubilee promotion, in Mr. Hume asked what ship?]-He did not which the oldest officers were taken acthen recollect the name of the ship, but cording to seniority; and he considered he had also been a lieutenant in the Albion, it a foolish promotion. The first lieuteand sir J. Gordon had honourably re- nants of flag-ships were generally the best ported his services to the admiralty. He officers, picked out by the admirals; and had also volunteered in a ten-gun brig to it sometimes happened that admirals had South America, and it did so happen that an inclination to keep them out of their a junior officer was put over his head; yet promotion too long. They were consethis young nobleman made no complaint, quently fit subjects of promotion. As to but conducted himself in a manner that the gross numbers to which the hon. clearly entitled him to the promotion member had referred, he had unfairly which he had received. As to the charge stated them. When he found fault with which had been made of that officer having the number of promotions since 1814, it been sent out to take the command of a should be remembered that there had vessel in the East Indies, which had not been fought since that period a certain been launched, it was true it had not been battle of Algiers, which attached to it launched before he set out, but it was ex- extensive claims. Many claims had also pected to be launched before he arrived. arisen out of the coast blockade, in the With counties of Sussex and Kent. Officers employed on that station frequently risked their lives, by dashing into the waves to save shipwrecked mariners. It would not be denied that such men deserved promotion. Then there had been pirates of a most audacious character in the Red Sea ; respect to the case of the hon. Frederick Spencer, upon which was grounded another complaint of parliamentary influence, it should be recollected, that his connections acted with the opposition. How, therefore, could that have been a case of parliamentary influence? The |