Tuesday's debate on naval construction, preliminary to Sir Ughtred Kay•Sbuttleworth's
statement on the main vote for officers and men, was very interesting. Sir E. Harland was for much longer men-of-war, Sir E. Reed for much shorter. • The latter, indeed, thought that our vessels of war should be less like ships, and more like fortresses. Still more important was Mr. W. Allen's protest against the manner in which the engineers' branch of the service is treated. On board war- cruisers of twenty thousand horse-power, there were only twenty men to look after the engines. On an Atlantic liner " having much less horse-power " there were twenty-six. " The reason why men would not serve more readily in the Navy as en- gineers was that those so serving were not treated and paid well enough." "A naval chaplain was paid £260 a year, whilst as assistant-engineer, who was largely responsible for the safety of the ship, was only given the miserable pittance of £130. Staffeurgeons were paid £240 each, but an engineer was only given 2200." He would rather break stones on the road than serve as an-assistant-engineer. Yet " on the engineers alone did the safety of the Fleet depend." We fear there is far too much truth in these charges ; and wish Sir Ughtred Kay-Shuttleworth had done more than merely pro- mise to inquire into the matter.
Previous page
