The Sun.
London, England, 1855-08-28 00:00:00

SWEABORO AND SIR CHARLES NAPIE.R,

(From the Examiner.).

It is perfectly clear that the destruction of Sweaborg
was effected by means of mortars. The range of these
powerful instruments of destruction being upwards of
3,000 yards— considerably greater than that of the guns
in the Sweaborg batteries--the assailants carried on
their principal operations in as oomplete safety as if
they had been practising against the butts at Woolwich.
The crews of the boats had indeed their ears deafened,
and in some instances their voices and chests injured, by
the tremendous concussion to which they were exposed
from the constant discharges of their mortars in such
close proximity ; but the Russians had as good a chance
of bringing down a sea-gull as one of their enemies by
a 32-pounder, and the probability of hitting by a shell
so small an object as a mortar-boat, at the range of
nearly two miles, is almost too remote for calculation.
It is clear, then, that without mortars it was not pos-
sible for Sir Charles Napier to effect what by their aid
alone Admiral Dundas has been able to accomplish. And
it is a significant fact, to which we have more than once
directed attention, that there was not a single mortar on
board the Baltic fleet last year.
The charge against Sir Charles Napier is therefore re-
duced to this, that he ought to have taken care not to
be unprovided with a proper supply of this kind of artil-
lery. But, on the other hand, may it not be assuming a
little too much to take for granted that Sir Charles,
when he took the command, knew perfectly well what
sort of a sea, aed what sort of a coast, and what sort of
harbours and forts those of the Baltic were ? We are
far from certain that he knew anything of this. He had
not, we believe, (nor much to the discredit of our Admi-
ralty) had any of his captains, ever before made a cruise
in the Baltic ; and the northern coasts of that sea are
so unlike all others, that without personal inspection
their peculiarities can with difficulty be understood.
Was it not, also, at least as much the business of Sir
James Graham and the Admiralty as of Sir Charles
Napierito know what sort of sea the Baltic is, and what
sort of ports and harbours it contains ?
For the quality, as well as the magnitude of the fleet
which it entrusts to the command of an admiral, there can
be no doubt that the:Admiralty is primarily responsible
are
aile
and we know that means of obtaining informationic
always open to a Government which an individual can-
not possibly command. Assuming this case that both
were ignorant, there cannot be a question where the
h
Lord Aberdeen's
vieua
pnce
on
foot Government e rens responsibilitymen t ca
llupon should fall.
the
En
gl
i a h
cDnind
aa
n
suls scattered along o
the coasts the Baltic fdo rvirceep- coornts
touching then nm state
noaf
tteh
te
h Re
suteshsai at
Was the Admiralty aware rep
nSf o fwrot sre
Sweden tre:nsSs aierls Chaswaany s .dkNeefeaep
s i
e r??
looksboats, and
of
her
upon
northern
mhe7r
caAs
i
the
o s otas large
only
They fleet
vesselset of gu
availablen for the defence
" b
Government, it is certain,t tpdohmsasvieresaslbe
been
facili-
ties
111-
t for obtaining every necessary information of thin
kind, and it was plainly their duty to put such into re- '
tified by other causes than those he is most eagoeiurngghhitillo
neither
nuie ctetal :nf forward Ngev perfectly
net ;dl yawnrcoeeorhnnmeoeoltailynchelhyihsai;lsnstbpyruielotmentooshfveaollfectotuenntwryrit'
be
despatched into the
hienasvnyffiblame
forof having
ervice it was sent to
iatfrngren then
to
be
not
shifted from Sir James Graham's to
ttno Balticic discharge
Sir Charles Napier's shoulders. As to making
requisi-
tions for mortars after he had arrived in the Balticthi
he appears to have done ; but it was then of