The Express.
London, England, 1853-02-18 00:00:00

' -THE EXPRESS, :FRIDAY EVENING, - FEBRUARY 184 14153

The hest member for Meath wishes us to follow the el-
ample of other Revernmeuts which profess the same reli-
gion as ourselves. Let me, in conclusion, recommend the
hon. member to follow the ezample of other members here
who profess the same religion that be does. (Cheers.)
Mr. KINNAIRD, after the &wrestle., which had been
given by the noble lord the Secretary of State fur Foreign
! Affairs, felt bound tr, follow the suggestion that .hat been
thrown out, and withdraw the motion. (Hear, heir.)
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
COAL DUTIES.
Sir J. SHELLEY moved to nominate the following
gentlemen as the select committee on coal duties:—Sir J.
Shelley, Mr. Mastermen, Sir Benjamin Hall, Mr. Miles,
Mr. Lowe, Mr. lier Selmer, Lord Robert Grosvenor, Sir
William 'oliate, Mr. Headiam, Mr. Deedes, Mr. Bleckett,
Sir James Duke, Mr. Vernon, Mr. Ewart, and Sir Henry
Meuz.

Mr. ALCOCK wished the nomination of the committee
to be postponed for a week, in order that an opportunity
might be afforded of ascertaining that all the liaCielitS con-
cerned in the inquiry, were fully represented. These coal
duties operated with peculiar injustice on many of his con-
stituents in Surrey. Take the cam of Croydon, for in-
stance; the inhabitants of which were called upon to pay
some 3,0001. or 4,0001. a-year to the City of London, fur ob-
jects Irons which they obtained no benefit
After a short conversation, the motion was agreed to.
MANCHESTER AND SALFORD EDUCATION.

Mr. GIBSON moved "that a select committee be ap-
pointed, to inquire into the state of education in the muni-
cipal boroughs of Manchester and Salford, and in the cun-
tig nous towr.ships of Broughton, Pendleton, anti Pendle-
bu•y, and whether it is advisable to make any further pro-
vision, and in what manner, for the education of the in-
habitants within such boroughs anti townships," which, after
the expression of a hope by Mr. Peto, that the advocates of
the voluntary system would be fairly represented on the
committee, was agreed to.
The Designs Act Extension Bill, and the Grand Jury
Cm (Ireland) Bill, severally paned through coromittee,und
the house adjourned at half-put 11.
Yesterday the committees appointed to inquire into the
electisns at Lancaster, Canterbury, and Tavistock, assem'iled
and proceeded wit their duties.

t:,-74reAA.

TO coßßwiroxllENTs.

k• ° UM= •1 The EMITS..." MIST.. ( 'WOWS. eTTTS%S.T
r.blialarl •.11111 Luria. ama Mao; •LAt, u. isL
kx I
Is—t tit-means laterded 'ar "I)* ”roe," Ur Xvesio;
.r'..: tkr Office, to, PA averia-areet, )7 TIN o'•;oti, ale t)e
t.Lt pubLioatioak.

POOR WATER AT LONDON BRIDOK.
tat. D4l—Mend.r. /ft 574 a. Atisesess. 9s. s7m.
.uotaqw—ltornlaig, 10a. 17 u., Afiersice. 101. Sl>.

LoArDOII7, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 18.

TO•MORT the House of Commons is to be asked to
vote the Nacy Estimates for the coming year,
amounting altogether to no less a sum than six mil-
lions two hundred and thirty-five thousand four
hundred and ninety-three pounds sterling. This is
a sum not to be thoroughly comprehended in its vast-
ness in a moment; but a sum, nevertheless, that
may be given even cheerfully by the nation and its
representatives, if they can be sure the huge total
will obtain for them th:tt which it is nominally vo'cd
to pay fur. This sum of more than six millions is
contributed for a floating force to guard the
country which yields it. It is raised to
make our shorts safe from invasion ; to
secure our merchant ships from hostile attack in their
distant way over the oceans that belt the earth—to
maintain our naval supremacy amongst civilised na-
tions, and to act, if need be, in concert with our mili-
tary forces in the event of war. Though a sum
nearly equal in amount was voted last year for the
Navy, we know only too well that for twelve months
pest we have been told we are not safe. We have
heard it declared, again and again, by men whose
business it is to understand the full power of mili-
tary arrangements,—and their capacity for sudden
application to the purposes of hostile atteck,—
that England is not secure from invasion if our
strange new neighbour the French Dictator thought
fit to try his fortune against us. The very possi-
bility of this view being sound has for some time
past put this country on its mettle. Men have been
saying, "We must be made safe. If we are not so,
the sooner the question is placed beyond doubt the
better. We can afford to pay for national defences,
and let us have efficient ones. Let us be sure on so
vital a point—since an invasion, like a fire, is a thing
to be prevented, not cured." Yet, whilst displaying
this thorough readiness to have all done that should
be done, and to pay liberally all that should be paid,
there hes been a very strong and very proper
sense of the need fur seeing that, under a cry
of danger a-head, we are not being cajoled into
new contributions for new patches on an old system
which is innately corrupt and unreliable. Men have
been saying again and again, " Why pay for more
ships and more men merely that they may be sent
away, as the others before them have been, to all
parts of the world, instead of being kept where we
are told they are wanted—near home. We have for
the last eight-and-thirty years been paying for a
fine Navy and a large Army about fifteen millions
annually. and yet at any one moment when there
has been any show of danger, we have been told
all our sacrifices have been vain, and that we

are comparatively defenceless. From time to
time there has grown out of these asser-
tions many explanations of various kinds from
different people, showing how our Navy is mud-
dled and wasted away how promotion goes
rather to influence than merit—how the prizes fall to
the aristocratic rather than the metitorions—how
our Navy List, like our Army List, is encumbered by
aged men, who block up the channels of promotion
from those fit for active service—how our ships are
jobbed and tinkered in the dockyards before going
to sea, and then after a voyage how they return to
those establishments only to be chopped about and
rudely dismantled in a way that ensures the least
amount of efficiency at the greatest amount of cost.
Of these charges there has never yet been satisfac-
tory. disproof. Yet now, when the day for payment
again comes round, the cry is " More, more!"
Again repeating, that England desires there
should be no stint for securing a good Navy, we
must repeat also that the public wish to pay for a
reality,—not for a sham. They, wish the House
of Commons to do its duty by voting a good Navy,
but at the same time to do its duty by insisting upon
having that Navy when voted and paid for. Last
year we were taxed for a Navy no lees a sum than
5,835,6881., and then we were told that our shores
were not safe from invasion. To-night a further ad-
ditional sum of 399,905!. beyond last year's total
is proposed to be asked for. But in that item surely
cannot reside all the difference between the alleged
insecurity of last year and the perfect security of the
less to come. No. The real secret of national safety
is sot simply in a liberal vote such as has always been
given, bat in that vote with the vital addition
of Naval Reform. We want efficiency • we want good
ships, well found, properly officered, and in their
right places. We need our six millions' worth of
naval armament as a reality, and not the largest
half of it in the shape of hulks, pensioners, dockyard
jobbery, and placemen. On the healthy structure of
our noble Navy there grows—as there grows under
the water-line of our ships—a mass of parasitic lum-
ber, which impedes its action whilst it impoverishes
its power. It is not the pay of seamen and officers
afloat that runs away with the money—nor is it the
cost of building the needful number of ships to keep
up good fleets—but the waste and the weak-
ness—for the two go together—is in the
dockyards, and in the old Admiralty system of giving
places in return for help at elections and in Par-
liament, instead of for services at sea. Nearly a
third of the total sum put down for the Navy Esti-
mates is spent in the dockyards—how spent we have
been too often told. When those great commercial
companies, whose steam navies now almost rival
1 those of Britain herself, and surpass those of most
foreign powers—when these Corporations want steam
ships, they go, like wise men, to the best market for
what they need. The builders of the Thames, the
Mersey, the Clyde, all compete which shall excel
the other in their competition for ships of fine
build, thorough seaworthiness, and fair cost. The
Companies no more think of setting up as builders at
ships on their own account than they think of starting
farms, on which to grow corn to make the biscuits
to be eaten on board their vessels. With ready
money in their pockets they go like wise men to the
best market to buy what they need. Not so our Go-
vernment. They must be boat-builders on their own
account. Docks in which to repair damage in
case of urgent need, with arsenals well stored
for war, are not enough. They must build
their own steamers and other ships. But then the
dockyards have another use—the dockyard artisans
and labourers have votes ! Perhaps no better step
mild be taken in reference to our Navy than
to sweep from the register of voters all persons who.
Towles their pay out of the taxes. The man who
lives on the national money is not in many cases p!r•
mitted to vote in the election of those who are in-
blasted with the spending of that money. Post-
masters, for instance, are not eligible as voters on
this proper constitutional principle. Yet what dif.
Immo in such case is there between the post-
master—generally a responsible trader—and a
dockyard artisan? If the postmaster is open to the
suspicion of governmental influence, the dockyard
employees are notoriously subject to fficial pressure.
It is matter of notoriety that naval ports become
"government boroughs. When the Tories are in
place during an election, they "work the dockyard
influence;" when the Whigs are in power they,
doubtless, do the same. Hence the masters of works
in these establishments have a double duty on hand :
they have to build and repair ships, and to make
and manage votes. They are at once artificers and
election agents. When filling vacancies in these
national workshops, the question between candidates
cannot therefore always be, Which is the best work-
man ? but often turns upon Which is the safest vote?
All who know anything
.of elections in such places,
or who get at the truth in any one of the dockyards,
—or who have read the evidence prepared
for an election committee sitting on a dis-
puted return for a dockyard borough, —will
be able to verify this view of a shameful
fact. What wonder then that we get bad
ships at a high price, or that successive Ministries,
when told that danger is at hand, find it easier to
ask the House of Commons to add to the cost of our
Navy than to make that Navy more efficient by
Naval Reform. Whilst Governments want dock-
yard votes they cannot get good and cheap dockyard
ships. And so wo go on from year to year

asking for reform—and not getting it. Mean-
while the taxpayers have only one reliance,
and it is on the truthfulness of their repre-
sentatives to the national interests when these sub-
jects come under discussion in Parliament. To-
night we shall see what number of our six hundred
and fifty-four M.P.'s will give nnything better than
a silent vote on the Navy Estimates.