The Press.
London, England, 1858-11-20 00:00:00

Volittral.

ADMIRAL SIR M. F. BERKELEY ON OUR
NATIONAL DEFENCES.
TIIE anniversary meetings of the three societies by
which the memory of the munificent Edward Calston
is celebrated were held at Bristol on Saturday
evening. The dinner of the Anchor or Liberal
Society was attended by Earl Ducie, Lord• Lieutenant
of Gloucestershire ; Admiral Sir M. F. Berkeley,
K.C.8., the late Senior Naval Lord of the Admiralty ;
Colonel Berkeley, M.P.; and the members for the
city, Mr. Henry Berkeley and Mr. H. G. Langton.
The toast of "The Army and Navy " having been
given from the chair,
Admiral Sir M. F. BERKELEY returned thanks on
behalf of the latter service. He commenced his
observations by referring to the letters published by
Mr. Kingscote in the Times relative to the Deal
boatmen, and stated that Mr. Kingscote had written
in ignorance of the subject. He asserted that not a
single man had been discharged at the end of the
Russian war but those who bad served their time and
desired their discharge; and he pointed out that no
man was receiving a pension for ten years' continuous
service, because the system of continuous service had
only been in operation live years. The gallant
admiral then addressed himself to the observations
made uy Lord Hardwicke relative to the condition of
the navy. He said :
Lord Hardwicke, who was a good sailor and an ornament
to the naval profession, had said that the British navy was
in a worse condition than it bad been in former days, and
that, though this was to be regretted, it arose not from any
neglect on the part of the Government, but in the improve-
ment daily making in science and art. In reference to
this observation of the noble lord he would point to
Birmingham, Sheffield, and other manufacturing towns,
and ask whether science and art had placed other countries
on a better footing than it had England ? He admitted
that it was not pleasant to pay fur science and art, but if
the country wished to maintain its maritime supremacy it
must build a new navy if foreign nations did so. Lord
Hardwicke said that the navy was " absolutely weaker than
that of some great powers near us; " but he differed from
the noble lord. He held in his hand the official returns
of the British and French navies, and he could give a
positive contradiction to Lord Hardwicke's statement.
He thought ;t unwise to publish the figures, but they were
at the noble lord's service. He could prove that Great
Britain was superior to every other country in materiel,
ships, officers, ay, and men. Lord Hardwicke bad also
sail that, notwithstanding the puffing of the British navy
and the boast that it was the finest in the world, yet it had
done little or nothing to bring the Russian war to a con-
clusion. Was it nothing to have eighteen sail of the line
in the Baltic to destroy Sweaborg, to capture Kertch, to
attack the forts of Sebastopol? He maintained that histo-
rians would have to record that the Russian war proved
more than anything else the great maritime power of
England. It must be recollected that foreigners were
supplied with the greater part of their means of transport
by the mercantile marine of this country; and when it was
known what the crews, both of men-of•war and merchant
ships, had done, it was idle to say that our ships were in-
efficiently manned. Lord Hardwicke had declared that
the British fleet " went to sea in such a condition as to
inflict a positive injustice on the brave officers in command
of the ships." In reply to that he would read a single
letter of many hundreds he had received; it was from ono