Minding their Ps and Qs; the Royal Navy purser and accounting and governance, 1731–1808

Abstract

This research explores the accounting regulations imposed on sea officers, particularly the purser, on board Royal Navy ships between 1731 and 1808. This was a period in which the Royal Navy grew to become one of the largest enterprises in Europe with operations throughout the world. The governance, control and accountability practices imposed upon pursers are analysed. The Regulations for accounting records to be kept by pursers indicate that accounting changed very little in the analysis period, until 1808, when it became substantially more detailed. Drawing on institutional theory, it is argued that this was due to external pressures for increased governance following the impeachment of Melville (First Lord of the Admiralty), public spending administrative and accounting reforms and political disapproval of ‘offices of profit’. The article provides important insights to the development of accounting, governance, audit and accountability within the Royal Navy, and enhances understanding of the historically unique role of pursers.

A French connection; paths to a ‘new system’ of accounting for the Royal Navy in 1832

“…The findings of this study contribute to the literature on accounting in peacetime in focusing on accounting change after wars. It builds upon investigations into Governance in the Royal Navy between 1731 and 1808 (McBride, 2019). The Regulations for accounting records (Regulations, 1731(Regulations, , 1790(Regulations, , 1808 show that accounting prescription in the Navy changed very little during the period until 1808 when it became considerably more detailed, although remained single entry bookkeeping on a cash basis.…”

“…The Regulations for accounting records (Regulations, 1731(Regulations, , 1790(Regulations, , 1808 show that accounting prescription in the Navy changed very little during the period until 1808 when it became considerably more detailed, although remained single entry bookkeeping on a cash basis. There were external pressures for increased governance following the impeachment of Lord Melville, Treasurer and then First Lord of the Admiralty (McBride, 2019). After these initial attempts at modification, accounting was changed again and there were moves towards a 'New System' of accounting, double entry bookkeeping in the mercantile style was finally introduced in 1832 to the Navy (1844(364)) 7 , this was successful and implemented elsewhere (1845(520)).…”

Accounting and governance in diverse settings – an introduction

“…As the Royal Navy was becoming one of the largest enterprises in Europe, governance, control and accountability practices were imposed upon sea officers, including pursers, who were particularly impacted. According to McBride (2019: 402–424), ‘more accounting, more form filling and more verification’ were required by regulations to provide the British government and other external groups with information about the performance of those who were managing the day-to-day affairs of the Royal Navy. Pursers, whose primary duties were receiving, issuing and accounting for provisions, became responsible for keeping more accounts as well as increasingly detailed accounts.…”

“…The 1808 Regulations even granted pursers with incentives to complete the accounts. McBride (2019) investigates these accounting practices in the context of political and financial pressures on the Navy. Pursers used accounting to increase their legitimacy and gain trust from the perspective that they were safeguarding the Royal Navy’s finances.…”

“…Pursers supported the Navy’s need for legitimacy, which was granted by an increment of regulation of operations and expenses control. In 1806, the impeachment of Viscount Melville (Treasurer of the Navy, later First Lord of the Admiralty) and the consequent revision of the Regulation helped the Navy presenting itself as a ‘financially responsible organisation’ (McBride, 2019: 402–424). As a result, accounting is found to facilitate governance issues related to legitimacy and funding by demonstrating fulfilment of the essential functions of recording, control and governance.…”