Nelson & His World

The end of conflict often put many officers 'on the beach', on half-pay. Some of them, we know, considered, or actually took up, service in foreign fleets. Did any of them make the shift from the Royal Navy to the merchant fleet, either on a permanent or a temporary basis? (Nelson did so for a short time as a youngster.)

Since their half-pay was a reward for previous service, and not a retainer against future service, presumably officers were free to join the merchant fleet if they wished; though maybe it didn't have the glamour that the RN had accrued in Nelson's day? Also, since the length of sea journeys was unpredictable, maybe officers didn't want to miss the chance of an appointment in the RN should it arise. But I speculate!

Officers had to pass examinations to establish their competence. When was a similar system introduced into the merchant fleet? When I worked at the PRO, we had all the 'tickets' issued to merchant seamen as these had to be returned to the Board of Trade on the death of the holder, but most of these, if I remember rightly, dated from the mid-nineteenth century. Sadly, maritime history wasn't a particular interest of mine then, otherwise I might have learned more; though I always thought the term 'Master Mariner' on the tickets sounded very fine indeed!

Dear Anna

I am afraid that your assumption that the purpose of half pay was to reward past services rather than act as a retainer is incorrect. Whatever individuals in the Admiralty may have felt about the system, the legal and financial justification for incuring this form of public expenditure - and for awarding it to and withdrawing it from individuals - was to ensure the availability of officers in the future.

Like so many things in the navy, this seems to have been assumed rather than explicitly stated in early years. An Order in Council of 1715 for example, which established a sliding scale for half pay, laid down six conditions for payment - three of which only make sense if the ‘availability’ objective is assumed, viz
4. those who were resident outside 'His Majesty's Dominions' were ineligible
5. officers were required to keep the admiralty informed of their places of residence.
6. they were not to be in any other form of government employ.

It is nevertheless true that the powers-that-be began to feel that half pay usefully acted as a reward for past services – but only up to a point. In 1737/8, for example, when the half pay arrangements were confirmed and amplified, it was realised that old age and infirmity meant that some officers were now physically incapable of service and therefore prima facie unable to satisfy the concept of availablity. The proposed (and accepted) answer was to take such officers off the half pay list and put them on a new ‘pension/disability’ list. Thus, officers remaining on the list were assumed to be ready, willing and able to serve.

There was no change in the official rationale for half pay and, in their covering explanation given by to the King in Council, the Admiralty were explicit for the first time about its purpose, writing

“We are humbly of the opinion that the chief end of allowing half pay is to retain and subsist commissioned officers while unemployed until the Crown may have occasion for their service, which may be taken from them upon their refusing to serve or other reasonable cause……”

This situation remained unchanged for the rest of the century - except for details, such as limiting the amount officers could could earn in alternative work when not employed by the navy. (An early example of the means test, now so familiar).

The answer to your first question therefore, is that officers on half pay did and could find berths on merchant ships without losing the entitlement - as long as lengthy overses residence was not necessary. Some - older officers - did this out of economic necessity; others - younger ones - to gain sea time - since the Admiralty recognised such service as contributing to the six years compulsory sea time required for the examination to lieutenant.

Brian

Many thanks, Brian, for that admirable clarification. I took on trust David Erskine's observations about half-pay in his notes to Augustus Hervey's Journal (scroll down to the last comment for a direct quote.) This is not the first time you've caught him out!

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=730

I'm dipping into Hervey's Journal occasionally as time permits. No doubt there will be further 'questions arising' and, no doubt, helpful answers, on 'Nelson's World'!