Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

those regattas which are conducted "on a liberal and extensive scale," the Cork Harbour Regatta may fairly claim a place,

Cove, June 1st, 1831.

I remain, your constant reader,

A MEMBER OF THE ROYAL CORK YACHT CLUB.

United Service School-Naval and Military Museum.

MR. EDITOR,-I have read with interest in your Journal for the present month, the report of a meeting, at the Thatched House Tavern, St. James'sstreet, preliminary to the establishment of a school for the education of the sons of Naval and Marine officers. It has occurred to me, that the benefits proposed in the formation of this school, the chief of which appear to be, to provide a respectable general education at a moderate expenditure, and to ensure to the pupil a society more select than would result from the union of boys in a school, open to all, where the premium is fixed at a low rate, may be extended to the sons of officers of the regular army,* and that with increased advantage to the institution itself, and to the country generally. As it is proposed to combine nautical instruction with the ordinary education of young people of the more respectable classes, it may be observed, that such elementary knowledge is equally adapted to prepare a youth for the army. Mathematics is the foundation of the peculiar studies of each profession, and languages, fortification, and artillery, are equally useful to one and to the other. The jealousies which once existed between the naval and military service are no longer known. The United Service have long felt that the glory and honour of each branch is reciprocally reflected on the other. The United Service Clubs, and your own periodical, Mr. Editor, have in no small degree contributed to foster this desirable feeling. The Naval and Military Colleges, too, are based on the principle, that the sons of officers of either service shall be admitted with equal advantage to one establishment or the other. If, then, the Crown has set an example of cultivating this union of interests between the services, is it not to be regretted that the principle should be deviated from in the formation of any institution which promises to be of national importance? If it were desirable to create an exclusive and illiberal feeling in the young men to be educated at the proposed institution, no surer method could be adopted than that now proposed; but, Sir, if instead of being a Royal Naval School, it were an UNITED SERVICE SCHOOL, it would tend to strengthen and perpetuate that cordiality of feeling between the Services, which is not only calculated to promote the individual happiness of officers of both Navy and Army, but is essential to the best interests of our country, and not unfrequently to the success of great national undertakings.

Your Journal of this month, Mr. Editor, announces the establishment of a Naval and Military Museum, an institution worthy of the utmost commendation and support, and not the less so for being another United Service Society. Its extreme liberality is, perhaps, liable to objection, admission being extended to bodies of men not identified with the profession of arms; it might be sufficiently comprehensive, if in addition to the officers of the Navy, Marines, and regular Army, it included all Company officers, their attachés, and the commandants or, at furthest, the field-officers of Militia and Yeomanry. In an United Service School, it could not be imagined that any could be admitted but the sons of officers of the Navy, Marines, and regular Army. The extension of number in a well-regulated establishment, the funds being proportionate to its increase, would, so far from lessening its advantages, augment them; much might be said in favour of this position, but, Mr. Editor, to your advocacy it is committed, no man being more

In our notice of the proposed Naval School, we recommended, and again strongly urge, that the Army should participate in its plan and benefits.-ED.

competent or better fitted to vindicate the cause of the United Service than you, whose labours are so consistently devoted to promote that union which is the life of both services; and it is conceived, the merits of the present question being apparent and its object important, you will not fail to lend to it your powerful and influential aid.

June 8th, 1831.

I have the honour to be,
Mr. Editor,

Your very devoted humble servant,

Σ.

Masters in the Navy.

MR. EDITOR,—It is very much feared that the rising generation of Masters, that is to say, those who have been brought up entirely in the navy, will not prove so good as the old stock who were grounded in the merchant service, in consequence, it is said, of their not having sufficient practical knowledge as Channel pilots. I have, therefore, to make a proposition, which, if found worthy a place in your Journal, may by that means meet the eye of some of the naval men connected with the Admiralty, viz. as the coast blockade is going to be done away, and as several cutters have lately been paid off, I have to suggest that eight or ten cutters should be employed in the Channel to prevent smuggling, &c. each of these cutters to be commanded by a master, and to be allowed four or five officers, either second-masters, master-assistants, or volunteers of the second class, and by that means these young men will have an opportunity of obtaining that practical knowledge of pilotage which is so necessary for a master.

I am, Sir,

YOUR CONSTANT READER AND SUBSCRIBER.

Mates in the Navy without Rank.

MR. EDITOR, Your pages being always open to any suggestions for the improvement of either service, I trust you will give insertion to the following comparisons between Ensigns in the Army and Mates in the Royal Navy. It is well known to all acquainted with Naval affairs, that a Mate has no rank whatever, although he must have served six years before he can pass his examination, and very frequently has served ten, eleven, and twelve years after he has passed, which qualifies him for the rank of Lieutenant, (equal to that of a Captain in the Army); whereas an Ensign enters the Army frequently at the age of sixteen or seventeen, which is at least two years younger than a Midshipman can pass, and has rank at once without a day's service. Surely that difference might be altered, (very much to the benefit of the service, as tending to render it more respectable, and certainly very much to the satisfaction of the officers concerned for the same reason,) by giving Midshipmen rank corresponding to that of Ensigns or Lieutenants in the Army, and a commission as soon as they have passed. Again, an Ensign, should he by any chance be placed out of employment the very day after he receives his first commission, has a right to half-pay; whereas a Mate, let him even have served twenty years as such on the most arduous duties, the moment he gets out of employment, (which he necessarily does much oftener than an Ensign, by ships in time of peace being paid off every three years,) does not receive one farthing of half-pay, and if he has (as is often the case) nothing but the service to depend upon, must either become dependent on his friends, or have recourse to manual labour for his bare subsistence. Is this a fit state for an officer to be reduced to who has served his Country faithfully, and in many instances fought her battles? Surely in these times of reform and improvement, these points should not be overlooked, but something should be done for a clas of officers who have bee long

looked down upon with contempt even by their superiors in the same ship, from their having no rank, and borne down by poverty and distress on shore, from having no resource from the moment they are paid off, should they (as it is too often the case) be unable to get another ship.

Hoping these remarks will meet the eyes of those honourable and gallant officers now at the head of the Admiralty, and lead to improvement,

I remain, Sir,

Your obedient humble servant,

A MATE.

Medical Department.

MR. EDITOR,-The Army in general, and in an especial manner the Medical Department, owe you many obligations for opening your Journal to an exposure of the abuses which have existed, and continue to exist in that department,—abuses which have arisen from a system of partiality and maladministration, that has produced distress and dissatisfaction little known to the public.* To have been a meritorious officer in the department, without at the same time having the power of gratifying the hobbies, and adding to the éclat and personal advantage of its chiefs,† has been to some a misfortune and source of disappointment as far as professional views in the service are concerned, whilst others have had favours lavished on them in a manner unprecedented in the bestowing of public rewards.

As specimens of the manner in which the department is conducted, it is only necessary to adduce some of the promotions of 1829, and particularly the extensive one of July 1830, which was understood to have been originally intended to include all those who had been actively and conspicuously employed during the arduous and trying duties of the late war, and who had been removed from permanent to unattached appointments. But mark how it was given in some instances to men who had declined unattached appointments, although held out as a sine qua non to further promotion, and preferred the comparative ease and permanent comforts of a regiment, and even to some of these, as if born and reared only for indulgence, was given a retirement greater than they had ever received as a full, efficient, and working pay. We shall say nothing of the ingratitude of ONE person in authority concerned in the recommendations, for whom the staff surgeons of the period alluded to did so much, and for whom he has done so little; but we shall say in some cases it was a most uncalled for promotion, and an unjustifiable expenditure of public money.

We trust, however, that a reform in the department is at no great distance, but in the mean time it is necessary the medical officers of the army should continue to make known the grievances they have so long laboured under. To M. M. in your last Number, the service is indebted for his judicious observations on the stations of the medical staff at home, and more especially for those in Ireland, which, as examples of gross injustice to the regular medical staff, are without parallel. We wish him success in his future investigations, and hope that they may be a stimulus to others to assist in exposing abuses which have excited so much complaint.

London, 13th June 1831.

M. S.

* Under the present system of management, so overloaded has the department become in all branches, that measures have been resorted to for its reduction which have been very severely felt by many, namely, the calling back into active service men who had been forced upon half-pay, and left for many years as practitioners in civil life, or compelling these men to receive a commutation in money at a very disadvantageous rate to the individual.

+ Every medical officer knows that allusion is here made to the funds and subscriptions for widows and orphans, and museums and libraries (at Aberdeen even), and pieces of plate and portraits, and to addresses and agencies, &c. &c. &c.

Army Medical Department.

MR. EDITOR, The discussions on the subject of the Army Medical Department in your excellent Journal, I opine, have been productive of no inconsiderable benefit; the late regulations appear to engross many of the points there referred to, but still there are omissions, and room for amendments, a temperate allusion to which in your pages may be attended with beneficial effects.

In the new warrant for regulating the grant of unattached pay, retired full pay and half-pay, the allowance to the medical officer placed upon halfpay is regulated by two different schedules; the first, if placed on half-pay by reduction of establishment, and the second, if placed on half-pay from any other cause. The distinction bears on its face every appearance of plausibility and justice, but fails in its operation, and that in a manner which presses so hard on staff and regimental surgeons, that I wonder it did not occur to the framer of these rates, and that it has not already been especially pointed out through the medium of your columns. Staff and regimental surgeons, after twenty years' service on full pay, were by former regulations entitled to ten shillings per diem, if obliged to retire on account of ill health; but according to the present, the state of their health on retiring is not taken into consideration, and by it, though retiring from ill health, they are only entitled to the inferior rate. Of this regulation I conceive medical officers who entered the service before its promulgation have just reason to complain; but the semblance of injustice would be less evident, if by the same warrant ill health did not expressly entitle other classes of officers on retiring to a superior rate of half-pay, an advantage which, by the by, former regulations did not give. This is turning the tables upon the poor medical officer with a vengeance. The standard by which his pittance on retiring from the service is henceforth to be meted is depreciated, whilst that of his brother officers is enhanced. Of what enormity has the medical department been guilty that they should be thus served out? surely amendment or explanation is here required.

By the late warrant regulating the appointments and pay of army medical officers, the different grade of ranks and commissions has been defined, but how does it operate in practice? The commissions of staff and regimental surgeons still clash. A number of staff surgeons have been appointed to regiments, and we find in the Army List, besides the date of their regimental appointment, that of "Forces" appended to their names. Now it might happen that one of these regimental staff surgeons was in garrison with a junior staff surgeon, in which case who would be principal medical officer? In analogous circumstances, officers with brevet rank are not allowed to serve in garrisons where their rank would interfere with that of the chief, or officer commanding. And again, if a staff surgeon serving with a regiment is to derive no advantage from his rank, a senior regimental surgeon would rank before him. These may appear trivial observations, but on such trifles the comfort and respectability of worthy individuals may hinge, and it becomes those who have the power, so to regulate the department, as to obviate, if possible, any jealous or unpleasant feelings which might arise from their occurrence.

All men naturally are desirous of distinction, and trifles often serve to elevate or debase us, not only in our own estimation, but in that of others. The staff surgeons employed in regiments, have in the Army List the date of their staff commission appended-why should not surgeons on the staff have the date of their regimental appointment as such also stated? It would distinguish old and meritorious surgeons, who have only lately accepted of the staff appointment, from their juniors in the service, who now figure as senior surgeons on the staff.

Regimental assistant-surgeons, when appointed to the staff, take precedence, according to the date of their regimental appointment, with staff

assistants. I cannot understand why regimental surgeons, when placed on the staff, should not possess the same advantage with regard to staff surgeons. Many of the staff surgeons now on the List, were only assistants when promoted to that rank, and according to the present discordant system, they are suffered to retain their station on the List, to the prejudice of those whose assistants they formerly were.

Hoping you will give insertion to these remarks, I remain,
Your constant reader,
UNUS QUORUM.

June 1831.

State of the Royal Marines.

MR. EDITOR,—On perusing your valuable Journal the other day, I observed a letter respecting the neglected state of the Royal Marines, which induced me to make inquiry as to the fact, and sorry am I to find that it is too true; yet it appears extraordinary it should be the case, when they have so repeatedly received the thanks of both Houses of Parliament, and it is well known that the nation appreciate their services: his present Majesty's most gracious speech, when Lord High Admiral, on presenting new colours to each division; his great kindness in recollecting them on his mounting the throne of his ancestors, by presenting to each division his picture; his public letter read to the corps on his relinquishing the Generalship of it, was and is most flattering and gratifying; but, Sir, when I tell you that its officers are the worst paid and the worst provided for in the way of promotion of all His Majesty's forces, you will without doubt think with them that they have been neglected by the Board under which they serve. In the first place, every Captain in the Line receives 11s. 7d. per diem, Captains of Marines only 10s. 6d. the Royal Artillery and the Royal Marine Artillery 201. per annum non-effective, in lieu of 1s. 1d. per day. Why this difference? Have they not fought and bled for their country? Are they wanting in zeal and loyalty to their King and country? No, Sir; on these points they will yield to no corps whatever, and all they ask for is equal remuneration.

Would you suppose (the nation, I am confident, cannot be aware of it) that their senior captains entered the service in the year 1795; their lieutenants are twenty-six and their ensigns nineteen years in the corps, consequently many of them nearly worn out; yet they are, and ever were, tout jour pret to fulfil their regimental motto, Per Mare et Terram.' Their proportion of field-officers to 10,000 men in four divisions, including 400 artillery, are one general, resident in London, four colonel-commandants, eight lieut.-colonels, eight majors, and one major to the artillery-total twentytwo. This is a small proportion when compared with any other corps. No less than twenty-four companies have been added during the peace, but not one field-officer. A circumstance of this kind would have been deemed very extraordinary, if not cruel, in any other branch of His Majesty's service. The sinecures of the corps, and by them considered their bane, consist of no less than seven appointments,-three generals and four colonels, at 201. per day, or at about 73001. per annum. These appointments are given to officers of the Navy, who are well provided for in that most honourable service, and really have no more to do with the corps than you have. It is heart-breaking to its officers to observe the sweets of promotion going on in every other corps. The rank of major bas been abolished of late in the Royal Artillery and Royal Staff Corps, without additional pay, until within the prescribed number of established lieut.-colonels of their respective regiments. The Engineers have the same indulgence. Why not grant the same privilege to the Royal Marines, as these corps assimilate nearer than any other? that is, they rise progressively; and when it is considered that there are at present only eight majors, one having already from length of

« ПредишнаНапред »