Another "peculiarly trying circumstance" alluded to by those officers, was that, when compelled by actual pecuniary necessity, in consequence of the deprivation of his rank and pay, and the demands of increasing family, to accept service under a foreign state as his only means of subsistence, he lay before the castles of Callao, into which had been removed for security the whole wealth of the rich capital of Peru, including bullion and plate, estimated at upwards of a million sterling, he preserved his war secret, though strongly urged to put it in execution. Had he listened to the temptation, in six hours the whole of that wealth must have been in his possession. For not listening to it, he incurred the enmity of his employers, who urged that they were entitled to all his professional skill and knowledge, as a part of his bargain with them; and his non-compliance with their wishes is doubtless amongst the chief reasons why they have not, to this day, satisfied their own offered stipulations for his services. Yet, at the very moment when he was displaying this self-sacrificing patriotism, lest his country might suffer from his secret being divulged, the Government of Great Britain had, at the suggestion of the Spanish Government, passed a "Foreign Enlistment Act," with the express intention of enveloping him in its meshes.[A]
[Footnote A: On Lord Cochrane's return from Brazil, having occasion to go before the Attorney-General, on the subject of a patent, that learned functionary rudely asked him, " Whether he was not afraid to appear in his presence? " Lord Cochrane's reply was, " No, nor in the presence of any man living." Evidence exists that the Attorney-General asked the Ministry if he should prosecute Lord Cochrane under the Foreign Enlistment Act, the reply being in the negative.]
II.
(Page 23.)
As a striking instance of Lord Cochrane's method of exposing naval abuses, part of a speech delivered by him in the House of Commons, on the 11th of May, 1809, is here copied from his "Autobiography," vol. ii. pp. 142-144.
An admiral, worn out in the service, is superannuated at 410£. a year, a captain at 210£., a clerk of the ticket office retires on 700£. a year! The widow of Admiral Sir Andrew Mitchell has one third of the allowance given to the widow of a Commissioner of the Navy.
I will give the House another instance. Four daughters of the gallant Captain Courtenay have 12£. 10s. each, the daughter of Admiral Sir Andrew Mitchell has 25£., two daughters of Admiral Epworth have 25l. each, the daughter of Admiral Keppel 24£., the daughter of Captain Mann, who was killed in action, 25£., four children of Admiral Moriarty 25£. each. That is—thirteen daughters of admirals and captains, several of whose fathers fell in the service of their country, receive from the gratitude of the nation a sum less than Dame Mary Saxton, the widow of a commissioner.
The pension list is not formed on any comparative rank or merit, length of service, or other rational principle, but appears to me to be dependent on parliamentary influence alone. Lieutenant Ellison, who lost his arm, is allowed 91£. 5s., Captain Johnstone, who lost his arm, has only 45£. 12s. 6d., Lieutenant Arden, who lost his arm, has 9£. 5s., Lieutenant Campbell, who lost his leg, 40£., and poor Lieutenant Chambers, who lost both his legs, has only 80£., whilst Sir A.S. Hamond retires on 1500£. per annum. The brave Sir Samuel Hood, who lost his arm, has only 500£., whilst the late Secretary of the Admiralty retires, in full health, on a pension of 1500£. per annum.
To speak less in detail, 32 flag officers, 22 captains, 50 lieutenants, 180 masters, 36 surgeons, 23 pursers, 91 boatswains, 97 gunners, 202 carpenters, and 41 cooks, in all 774 persons, cost the country 4028l. less than the nett proceeds of the sinecures of Lords Arden (20,358£), Camden (20,536£), and Buckingham (20,693£).
All the superannuated admirals, captains, and lieutenants put together, have but 1012l. more than Earl Camden's sinecure alone! All that is paid to the wounded officers of the whole British navy, and to the wives and children of those dead or killed in action, do not amount by 214l. to as much as Lord Arden's sinecure alone, viz. 20,358£. What is paid to the mutilated officers themselves is but half as much.