Mr. E. J. Reed, formerly Constructor of the Navy, in
a very important letter to Friday's Times, puts his finger, as we believe, on the real source of the greater number of our worst naval dis- asters, when he points out how excessively under-paid, under- estimated, and under-ranked the chief engineers of our great naval steamships are. We have again and again insisted on the fact that it is to the defective scientific training of the mane- gen of these great and elaborate machines that we must ascribe many of our naval misfortunes ; and Mr. E. J. Reed's story ex- plains this defective scientific training, by pointing out that the engineers of the Navy are ranked and paid and generally dealt with as if they were far below their true importance. Our most important ships-of-war, says Mr. Reed, are "worked by steam," while " a separate steam-engine starts and stops them ;" " steam ventilates the monster, steam weighs the anchor, steam steers her, steam pumps her out if she leaks, steam loads the gun, steam trains it, steam elevates and depresses it ; the ship is a steam being, and the only man who understands it, can work it with safety, can control it efficiently, can use it, care for it, tend it, preserve it, repair it, renew it, is the e • eer." And yet this
is how the engineer is treated :—" The engineer is to-day almost precisely where he was twenty years ago." Admirals, captains, commanders, lieutenants, sub-lieutenants, cadets, all the navi- gating officers, rank before the engineer. While there are sixty Fleet officers of the Admiral class on the Active List, there are but ten Fleet engineer officers. In the ' Devastation,' the chief engineer ranks only twelfth of the sixteen first officers, and all the subordinate engineers rank below any of the sixteen. A couple of commanders, half-a-dozen lieutenants, a staff sur- geon, and a paymaster all take precedence of him, and he gets less than £300 a year for his pay. Of all heads of departments in the ship, the chief engineer is the lowest. While an admiral on full pay gets £1,825 a year, the chief inspector of machinery gets but £465. Who, then, need wonder that the scientific inspection of our Navy is not efficient, and is not a duty which a highly educated man could covet ?
Previous page
