'History of the Indian Navy. (1613-1863).' [‎302] (321/622)

302
HISTORY OF THE INDIAN NAVY.
were built, the Court directed that the commands should be
held by commanders. Formerly, also, the commanding officers
supplied the servants and provisions, but, in 1847 or 1848,
Government gave the provisioning of the passengers and
supply of the servants, to a Parsee contractor, who, of course,
tried to make all he could out of the contract. The complaints
of the public were now loud and frequent, but there was no
help for them, as the captain was not responsible.
Soon after the appointment of Commodore Lushington, mucli
discussion had occurred in England on the condition of the
Indian Navy, and a Committee of the House of Commons was
appointed to inquire into the subject. In May, 1850, Sir
Charles Wood, the Chancellor of the Exchequer expressed
himself strongly against the principle of employing ships of
war in the packet service, and procured the transference of these
duties to the Peninsular and Oriental Company; but, neverthe
less, the change was not carried out until Sir Charles Wood,
now presiding over the Board of Control Formally known as the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India, it was established by an Act of Parliament in 1784 to supervise the activities of the East India Company. , carried into effect his
own recommendations made to the Court some years before.
The contract for the conveyance of mails and passengers was
given to the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and the
steamers of the Indian Navy were reserved for purely naval
duties.
The second point referred to above, which was an anomaly
such as probably never before existed where common sense
ruled the day, was the fact that the administration of the
Indian Navy was subject to the control of a Military Board and
a Military Audit Department, so that military officers, who did
not know the difference between the main-sheet and a sprit-
sail yard, allowed or disallowed the expenditure of stores
according as their wisdom prompted them, thus causing endless
delays to officers before their accounts were passed, vexatious,
and, oftentimes, ridiculous references being made to them long
after they had quitted their ships.* 5 Formerly the Military
* The following anecdotes, told in the Service, illustrate the profound ignorance
of the Military Board as regards nautical matters ;—
A master sent in his expense and supply books to be audited at that office; a
spar, it appeared, had been expended during the cruise of the vessel, and to prove
that such was the fact, he appended to his accounts a copy of the ship s log,
wherein it was shown that on such a day, and at such an hour, the main-topsa
yard was carried away, and immediately replaced by another. The Board, how
ever, not knowing the precise meaning of the technical term " carried away,
imagined that the yard had been clandestinely taken off by some one, and, m ie
plenitude of their wisdom, they sent the account books back to the master, wi
a letter, calling upon him for an explanation, and intimating at the same im
that it was a highly reprehensible proceeding, to permit any article, the P r0 P® r 7
of Government, to be carried away without some authority for so doing; an
the absence of this authority, the master would either be charged the lu va u
the missing spar, or he was to have it brought back again. r a
Another instance, still more ludicrous, occurred on board one of the 8 e ^ ie _
The master, or accountant, it seems, had used more rope and plan