On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
He then proceeded to make certain allegations , which were very obscurely expressed , but the upshot of which appears to be , that Mr . Monsell , the clerk" to the Ordnance , interfered greatly with his ( witness ' s business ) . On -j | vacancy occuring at the Tower , Sir Thomas recommended two gentlemen , and their papers were sent in , ; but Mr . Monsell " took away the papers , " and he believed they went " elsewhere . " Nothing further was done in the matter , though Sir Hew Ross , the Lieutenant-General of Ordnance , acting in the place of Lord Baglan , had decided on promoting the two gentlemen referred to . Witness believed the whole of this disorganisation arose from the absence of the Master-General . He certainly did not think that anything of
this sort would have occurred if the Master-General had been present . Nevertheless , Sir Thomas stated that he believed Sir Hew Ross ' s privileges to be identical with those of the Master-General ; and yet that " no order could be given for any expenditure of money without the signature of the ' Master-General . " Another instance of Mr . Monsell ' s interference arose in this way : — A gentleman of great ability was appointed to an office , but in two or three instances evinced an insubordinate turn of mind . On two occasions , he was reprimanded by Sir Hew Ross , who , the second time , took the advice of the witness , and of General Gator at Woolwich . Both agreed with him ; and the gentleman received a written rebuke . Thereupon , Mr . Monsell called upon
the board to rescind their proceedings , and told them that , if thev did not do so , he would place the papers in the hands of the Secretary for War . Ultimately , " the papers were taken away by Mr . Monsell , " to use the precise -words of the witness , who added that he " believed" they were placed in the hands of the Secretary for War . They had never been returned , nor had the decision which had been come to been rescinded . Sir Thomas did not think that the requisition as regarded huts for the troops in the Crimea had been carried out ¦ with the accustomed regularity . The matter was carried on between the war department and the Secretary at War , and finally by the Board of Ordnance , who approved of -what had been done .
Mr . Monsell , clerk to the Ordnance , was next examined . The most important part of his evidence related to a statement that _ he had on his own authority ordered two bays to be added to the laboratory at Woolwich . This statement Mr . Monsell entirely denied ; asserting , however , at the same time , that the bays were really wanted , and that they would be no loss of money . Lord Seymour , observing that there must have been some person to represent the Board of Ordnance , inquired who that person was ; but Mr . Monsell could not
aay . The Chairman : " What steps did the Board of Ordnance take on discovering the irregularity ?"—Mr . Monsell : " I cannot tell ; for I was not in London at the time . " —The Chairman observed that it appeared a public work was altered , and the alteration proceeded with , without a knowledge of the fact coming to the Board ; to which Mr . Monsell assented , adding that the sanction of the work was given _ by the Board on the 15 th of January , after the work had been executed ; and that the officer of Engineers , Captain Collinson , must have believed * he had a verbal order from witness
to go on with it . Captain Collinson appeared to have made a distinction between the bays and the object for which they were to be erected , and to have thought that , though witness did not sanction the purpose to which the building was first to have been applied , ' he did sanction the building itself . The contract for the building , Mr . Monsell thought , must have been made with Captain Collinaon . The witness then proceeded to give some particulars concerning the shell-foundry at Woolwich . Finding last May that there was a lamentable deficiency in the supply of shells , he sent for Captain Boxer , of the Royal Laboratory , told him their position , their difficulties , and asked his advice . He said , if they would place at his disposal the sum of 7000 / ., he would
erect machinery that should not only do the work rapidly , but , in a short time would save the whole expense . Captain Boxer was second in command of the Royal Laboratory . He ( Mr . Monsell ) thereupon took upon himself to sanction the expenditure of 7000 / ., and the result of having done so was , as he could satisfactorily show the committee , a saving in one week of 1200 ? . to the country in the construction of shejls . At the same time they were placed beyond the possibility of ever running aground for shells . In answer to Sir John Pakington , Mr . Monsell acknowledged that ho took no steps for ascertaining if the 7000 / . was the correct sum for the service , and that the work was ordered upon the unsupported assurance of Captain Boxer that that sum
would be required . He gave , the order without any sanction on the part of his colleagues . According to his view , he had the power to do so . Mr . Monsell denied tho assertion of Sir Thomas Hastings that the building had . been constructed on a larger scale than tho contract to which he affixed his signature . Tho witness then gave some details of tho differences between Colonel WUaon and Captain Boxer at Woolwich , to which Sir Thomas Hustings had obscurely referred . Theso , he said , arose from Colonel Wilson refusing to allow Captain Boxer to dismiss , for inattention , a man employed in hia ahell factory . The former stood on his authority aa superior officer ; the latter contended that , unices he had full power over the men in his own factory , ho could not carry on the works properly . Upon this ,
Captain * Boxer was reprimanded ; but Mr . Monsell , knowing the great services the captain had rendered , placed the whole matter in the hands of the War Minister , and urged the expediency of withdrawing the censure . TUESDAY . •" - Sir Thomas Hastings was recalled , and gave some very intricate explanations respecting the order for the hats . Mr . Monsell ' s examination was then resumed . He stated that he had received a letter from Captain Collinson relative to the construction of the two bays , from which it appeared that the bricklayers' and carpenters ' work was not begun until the proceedings had been sanctioned by , the board , Mr . Monsell then gave a variety of details , the upshot of which indicates a state of considerable disorganisation in the Ordnance . A minute , relating to the purchase of some machinery , Mr . Monsell said he could not find ; and it came out that " all minutes , excepting those of very great importance , are kept upon loose sheets of paper . " In the course of his evidence , the following conversation ensued between the witness , Mr . Layard , and General Peel : — .
Mr . Layard . — "At the beginning of tjie war -was the Board of Ordnance in a condition to meet the urgent demands on them ?"—Certainly not . " To what do you attribute that want ?"—Undoubtedly there was not a sufficient quantity of stores , not sufficient means of procuring them , no such appliances as I have described in my evidence respecting the manufacture of fuses , and altogether we were in a state of considerable difficulty . We were compelled to use very extraordinary means to overcome those difficulties , or we should have been in a worse state than we are . " To what do you attribute those deficiencies ?"—I attribute them almost entirely , if not altogether , to the small amount of warlike stores we had in hand at the time of commencing war . General Peel . — " Was that attributable to Parliament not having voted sufficient money ?"—Yes , if the money was asked for ; but as much is attributable to
Government . Mr . Layard . — " Has the Government ever been refused money by Parliament ?"—I never heard of it . " Then it is not right to throw on Parliament the blame of the defective sfete of the Ordnance ?|'— I said the Government is as much responsible for it as the Parliament . In answer to other questions , Mr . Monsell said the difficulties which had lately arisen in the Ordnance were rather attributable to the fact of the Board being as it were in a moribund state , it being well known that large changes of organisation were contemplated . A change of practice had occurred since the separation of the Colonies from the War Department , but no difference occurred at the Board of Ordnance until November . He further said that he fully concurred in the opinion of the Duke of Newcastle that the organisation of the department is defective . At the close of Mr . Monsell ' s ' evidence , Sir F . Smith , Commander of Engineers , was called . His testimony , which was brief , related to the contract for the huts ; but it did not contain any points of general interest .
WEDNESDAY . WEDNESDAY . Mr . Sidney Herbert was examined ; and commenced his evidence by giving a technical description of his official position as Under-Secretary for War , from which it appeared that his duties were greatly complicated with those of the Secretary-a £ -War , the Commander-in . Cb . ief , and the heads of the Treasury . He stated that tho office of Secretary-at-War is virtually not abolished even now , but that the office is held simultaneously with tho Secretaryship of State for War by Lord Panmure , it being necessary to continue the nominal existence of the office , in consequence of the existence of particular acts of Parliament , which must be repealed formally if the office were altogether abolished . Preparations were not at
first made for a long stay in the Crimea , as it was intended to take Sebastopol by a coup de main . When the army left Varna , Dr . Hall gave orders that all necessary stores and medical comforts should be sent on from there to Constantinople ; but , whether from deficiency of transport or misunderstanding , this was not done ; and on the occasion of the first importation of sick and wounded to Scutari there was a great want of medical comforts and stores . To remedy this state of things , Mr . Herbert said that he wrote to Lord Stratford de Redcliffe , and kept up a continuous correspondence with the medical officers and purveyors there , ordering them to exert themselves , to purchase on the spot everything that was obtainable , and to let him know what were their present and what their future wants . He believed that tho
establishment of the general hospital at Scutari proceeded from Lord Raglan ; and he supposed he ordered it on tho recommendation of Mr . Calvert , who had considerable local knowledge . He ( Mr . Herbert ) took every necessary precaution that neither forms nor economical" considerations should militate against the efficiency of tho hospital establishment at Scutari ; and ho accordingly wrote to Dr . Menziea , tho head of tho medical department , and to Mr . Wroford , tho purveyor , and to Major Sillory , tho then commandant , urging upon them strongly tho simplification of all forms , and every effort was made to purchase whatever could bo had on the spot ; for , though a check upon expenditure is very necessary in time of peace , in timo of war , pounds , shillings , and pence ore not to bo put in competition with human life . Theso « mm munioations wore in writing , and were made in
consequence of statements that appeared in the press denouncing in strong terpas the deficient state of the hospital He received , however , letters from Dr . Menzies , contradicting these statements in the strongest terms . But the fact he believed was , that there was plenty that would bear contradiction , and plenty , uncontradicted , sufficient to condemn the system . He gave Mr . Wreford , the purveyor , carte blanche as regards expenditure ; writing to him to that effect on the 11 th of last December . No doubt a great part of the difficulties that occurred arose from not having an efficient military commandant . His belief , from all he had heard , was , that Major Sillery was a man who worked very indefatigably in his owa department , according to his own light ; but he was not
a . man of that rank in the army that ought to have beea placed in charge of so gigantic an establishment . It waa perfectly true that Major Sillery had not by any means an adequate staff for an hospital of 3000 or 5000 people , and such an establishment would necessarily require a very large staff to inspect it daily , and report on its condition . But as he ( Mr . Herbert ) thought it right to have an officer of higher rank , he recommended Lord William Paulet to the Duke of Newcastle ; and that nobleman succeeded Major Sillery . Under his supervision , the defects in the administration of the hospital were amended . —Having given some particulars with
respect to the supply of clothing , the witness went on to state that he thought Sir Thomas Hastings had misapprehended the facts when he said that he ( Mr . Herbert ) had ordered fur caps at 6 s . 8 d . for the troops when they could be got in the market for 5 s . lOd . On Mr . Herbert making some allusion to the Foreign Legion , Mr . Drummond asked him if he did not think it would be advantageous to have a legion of Spanish bashibazouks . At this there was some laughter , in which Mr . Herbert joined , and made no other answer . On resuming his evidence , he stated that he appointed the firm of Howell and Hayter as packers of the army stores , but that he was " not aware that he knew" that Mr .
Hayter , of that firm , is brother to Mr . Hayter of the Treasury , though , if he had known it , it would not have influenced him . He believed that the subordinates in the office of the Secretary-at-War are the most efficient that are to be found in any of the public departments under the Crown ; and he attributed this to the system which prevails there of promotion by merit , rather than by seniority , to which , however , there are occasional exceptions . With the view to correct the evil of the different departments acting in ignorance of the proceedings of one another , he proposed to the Duke of Newcastle in the course of last year to have periodical meetings at the War-office of the heads of all the departments ; so that when instructions were given by the
Secretary of State they should be given in the presence of all the heads . That proposition was adopted , and it worked so well that the Government thought it necessary to give those periodical meetings a more formal character . Accordingly , before leaving office , he was desirous of bringing the heads of the war departments under a board , which would have partly resembled that of the Admiralty , only the Minister for AVar would have been more of an autocrat than the First Lord of the Admiralty . That board would have consisted of the Commander-in Chief , to govern the army ; the Master-General of the Ordnance , to arm and equip the army ; the Secretary-at-War , to control the finance of the army and move the whole war estimates in Parliament ; and a commissary-general , if it was thought necessary , to
feed tho army . r , , . This concluded the evidence of Mr . Herbert and the business of the day . THURSDAY . The first -witness examined on this day was Mr . Wood Secretary to the Board of Ordnance during the last eighteen months , and for fifty years in the service , He said that he was not aware of any particular inconvenience arising from the absence of the Master-General . Nevertheless , he stated that the Master-General could boardbut tn
reverse the proceedings of the general , . u the Lieutenant-General could not ; so that the power which was complete in the Master-General became divided in the Licutenant-Gencral . Tho latter , however , had tho same superintending power as the former on « u military subjects . Referring to the shell-foundry at Woolwich , tho witness said that , if it was commenced before tho matter came before the board , it was irregular . During tho length of time ho had been in the sorvicc , never knew a largo public building commenced withot the sanction of the board and of the Master-General . bo
Ho admitted , however , that a tender could nw « I'J \" by one member of tho board , and that , m fact , a laryo contract might bo entered into by one member alone , but the Board of Ordnance would bo responsible . Roar-Admiral Dundaa , formerly in command of tho Black Sea Fleet , was next examined , and said , in oi . a « tr to the Chairman , tlmt the Admiralty , on his sal ing , gave him a " roughish statement" of the maritime strength oi Russia , but that it was an old , not a recent , » tat « nont . Tho Chairman . — " But did you not know its stromrHi bettor when you got into the Black Scat - Admiral Dundas .- " Not a bit of it . ( Laughter ) In plied to tho ambassador at Constantinople , and he sw mo just aucli another as I had from tho Admira y ~ - worth nothing . " He tho proceeded to say th . t ho mode inquiries of the conaula in the Dardanelles , but could g £ no information . Ho therefore wrote a lot tor to ^<
Untitled Article
436 THE LEADER , [ Satubpat ,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), May 12, 1855, page 436, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2090/page/4/
-