The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-19 00:00:00

" THE ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT.

" Your. committee deem it unnecessAry to state the
various duties of the Ordnance Department, nor need they
enter into details with the view of proving th upon the
efficiency of this department the naval and military ser-
vices depend.
" In April, 1854, Lord Raglan, the Master-General of
the Ordnance, was appointed to the command of the forces
in the East; and shortly afterwards Sir Hew Ross was
named lieutenant-general of the Ordnance—an office which
had been for many years abolished, but which was now re-
vived. _ _

" Lord Aberdeen, in making this appointment, had to
some extent in view the abolition of the office of Master-
General. Thu subject had not, however, been considered
by the Cabinet, and in the meantime the Ministers believed
that the Lieutenant-General would have all the authority
of Master-General.

" The Lieutenant-General does not possess this power.
He is only a board officer ; and while in reference to mill- •
tary duties he exercises the ti athority of Master-General,
yet as regards the civil functions of the Ordnance he acts
only as a member of the board.
" The Board of Ordnance, moreover, differs from other
boards in this respect—namely, that according to the prise.
tice or to the regulations of the department, the presence
of one board officer constitutes a board. During the sum-
mer and autumn of 1854, a board officer, the Surveyor-
General, was also emuloyed abroad ; so that during a period
when the pressure of business was heavier, and when the
expenditure of this department was larger than in any
previous year, two officers were wanting whose functions
the most economical administrations had been unable to
dispense with in times of peace.
" The Ordnance, even with its peculiar constitution,
may work efficiently while under the superintendence of a
vigilant Master-General, who has supreme authority, and
who is, therefore, justly held responsible for all its pro-
ceedings ; but the substitution of a lieutenant-general
changes the whole system of the office ; its duties are then
divided among the members of the board without any su-
pervising authority, and the business commenced by one
member may be taken up or interrupted by another with-
out unity of purpose, and without due responsibility.
" The evils arising from the absence of the Master-Gene-
ral are abundantly exhibited in the evidence. The state-
ments of Sir T. Hastings, the Comptroller of Stores, and
of Mr. Monsen, the Clerk of the Ordnance, amply prove
the unsatisfactory state of this department, while it would
seem, from the language of Sir Hew Ross, that he was im-
perfectly acquainted with the constitution of the board of
which he was a member.
" From the evidence it will be seen that a conflict of au-
thority arose between the members of this board. At a
time when urgent business required their attention they
were engaged in disputes, in preparing statements, and in
making appeals to the Secretary of State for War. Sir
Thomas Hastings says, that although he made more than
one application informing the Secretary of State that he
had important communications to make to him, he received
no answer to his letters. Mr. Monsen, when he differed
from the other members of his board, applied to the Sec-
retary of State, who, by lending his sanction to the Clerk
of the Ordnance, enabled him to overrule both his col-
leagues, and thus interfered in a matter involving ques-
tions of military discipline, as well as of departmental sub-
ordination. In noticing the unseemly conduct of this board,
and the differences which were brought prominently for-
ward in the evidence, your committee observe with regret
that the public service has suffered from the want of judg-
ment and temper on the part of officers who were en-
trusted dui ing a critical period with important public
duties.
" Your committee consider that it was detrimental to
the public service that the office of Surveyor-General
should have remained so long vacant, and that the duties
attached to that. office should have been consequently im-
posed upon officers of the department who had already as
much upon their hands as they were able to perform effici-
ently.
" Your committee believe that Lord Aberdeen would
have acted more beneficially for the public service if he had
appointed another Master-General when Lord Raglan could
no longer discharge the duties of the office, and they are of
opinion that a vague intention of remodelling the Ordnance
Office affords no justification for the course pursued. If
this office were deemed to be imperfect, and ill-adapted for
its functions, there was the more need during its continued
existende of an able man to superintend its proceedings.
The Ordnance-office strikingly exemplifies the disordered
state into Which a department may fall when there is no
able hand to guide it.

" After perusing the evidence, it will excite no surprise
to find that the arrangements attempted by this office in
reference to warm cluthing, huts, and Millie rifles were
imperfect and dilatory. Huts were ordered at Constanti-
nople and Trieste, as well as in this country. The first
order here was issued on the 17th Of ,Novemb3r. Whea
the huts at length arrived at Balaklava, the exhausted
transport service was unable to convey them to the camp.
It appears from the evidence of Sir J. Burgoyne and Sir
F. Smith that if canvas had been sent for doubling the
tents, and planks for flooring, effectual shelter for the
troops would have been provided at a much earlier period,
and at a smaller.cost. It is impossible not to believe by
these means the sickness and suffering of the troops would
have been diminished.

" Your committee must express their dissatisfaction
with the administration of the contract system under this
department, and they consider that no change will be
effective which does not lead to a revisal and amendment
of this branch of the office.

"The tools supplied to the army are stated to be of bad
quality. Under a recent order the Ordnance furnish all
tools. The pioneers' tools were heretofore supplied by the
colonels of regiments. For this last supply the Ordnance is
not responsible. The officers examined almost uniformly
describe the tools supplied to the army as unserviceable. Sir
T. Hastings, on the other hand, states that hebdlieves the
great mass of tools were good, but thinks that many have
been ill-treated, and that good tools in the hands of men
who do not understand them may be readily destroyed.'
There is; however, no doubt, that upon previous occasions
as well as in the present campaign, these articles of field
equipment have been condemned. In this country under a
proper system of contract and inspection there can be no
difficulty in obtaining tools of the best quality. The supply
of inferioi tools must ba ascribed to carelessness or disho-
nesty on the part of the parsons responsible for the supply.
Your committee cannot ton forcibly express their opinio❑
of the importance of placingin the handsof the soldiers the
very best articles that can be provided.
" While the committee have felt it their duty to make
theseobservations on the inadequate and disordered state of
this department, and its failure in some important func-
tions, they feel bound, at the same time, to mention the
admirable equipment of the corps of artillery attached to
the army; and the testimony generally given to the effi-
cient armament provided for the navy.

" THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT AT HOME.

"The sea transport between this country and the seat
of war has been conducted by the Board of Admiralty,
under the immediate superintendence of Captain Milne,
one of the Lords of the Admiralty. This business was
formerly transacted by a Transport .Board, which was
abolished many years since. During the past year requi-
sitions for transport were sent to the Admiralty from
several different quarters • the inconvenience of this
system was so great, that Sir James Graham says he
deemed it indispensable, with the view to regularity
and promptitude, to bring .these requisiti ins to one
common centre, from which the Admiralty might receive
orde. s. This change had not, however, been con-
pleted before he left office. The Duke of Newcastle
says, that no system will work well until the sea.tianseoct
is placed under the management of the Minister for War.
Such a course Sir J. Graham and Capt. Milne consider ob-
jectionable ; it would, they-say, divide authority, increase
correspondenoe, and lead to confusion ; whereas now the
whole service afloat is united together in one link of re-
sponsibility.
" Sir J. Graham was, however, induced to re-constitute
the Transport Board, for the reasons which will be found
in his evidence.

" The mode in which ships were taken up is stated by
Capt. Milne, and considering the urgent pressure of the pub
service, thisbusiness appears tohavebeen ably conducted.
In pronouncing this opinion, your committee advert to the
magnitude of the operations executed. Within a year
somewhere about 150,000 men and above 700 J horses were
conveyed, principally by steam, it large portion of them
to a point 3,000 miles distant from this country ; besides
which vessels had to be provided for stores to an enormous
amount, for the purposes of war, for the sustenance
of both army and navy, and for the effective mainte-
nance of a steam fleet. Sudden requisitions fur huts, and
other urgent necessaries, had also to be met.
"There is, it is said, an obvious error in comparing the
transport service between England and the Crimea to a
mercantile arrangement for the conveyance and delivery of
a given amount of tonnage. The transports, when sent to
the Crimea, could not deliver their stores and return.' A
large number were permanently detained, from military
considerations, and many otherN were kept at Balaklava,
because there were no warehouses on shore to receive their
cargo. _

"Many complaints were made to your committee of the
mode in which stores were sent to the East. The mods in
which stores were sent depended on the nature .of the re-
quisition.' Naval stores were apparently sent under a
satisfactory system. When the Ordnance Board apply, a
vessel is placed at their disposal provided they require it '-
and, latterly, a similar system has been adopted with
the medical department. The chief complaints have
arisen in reference to mixed cargoes. The captains of the
vessels, according to the Admiralty instructious, have
charge.of the cargo ; but it is admitted that when large
passenger steamers were employed in this service the cap-
tains were often unaccustomed to these duties, and in such
cases the appointment of a supercargo would have been
beneficial. Until December it appears that a cargo-book
was not regularly kept. A Treasury minute, dated 12th
December, 1854, states, that some articles sent out to the
Crimea have been taken back to England in the same ves-
sels, and brought out again to the Crimea before they
have been delivered ; and that in other cases, where the
vessels have remained with the army, it has been three or
four.months before they had been received by the commis-
sariat. Ships were also so loaded that on arriving at the
port to which pat of the cargo was unknown, and the
ship had. to proceed on her voyage, carrying with her
things that ought to have been delivered at the interme-
diate port. Much suffering was the consequence of this
faulty mode of proceeding, the sick at Scutari being in.
need of stores, which, in consequence of bad arrangements,
were carried to Balaktava.

" The unnecessary sufferings of the soldiers directly re-
ferable to this neglect form one of the most painful por-
tions of the evidence; but on what department the blame
should rest, whether on the office of the Commander-in-
Chief, or of the Secretary-at-War, or of the Secretary of
State for War, your commitece are unable to decide.

"Dr. Menzies had also, in a report to Major Sillery, the
commandant, dated the 7th of August, directed attention
to this subject.
" No steps having apparently been taken in pursuance of
this suggestion, or of that of Dr. A. Smith to the military
secretary, on the 25th May, 1854, Sir J. Graham, on the 25th
of October, at the instigation of the Duke of Newcastle,
wrote a private letter to Vice-Admiral Dundas, request-
ing him, after conferring with Lord Raglan, to have two
large steamers fitted for this service. On thel receipt of
this letter, Admiral Dundas did not, as he states, act,
because every one expected to be in Sebastopol in a
few days, and moreover he did not consider the transports
to be under his superintendence.
"Thus it appears that the preparation of ships for the
conveyance of the sick and wounded was at first forgotten,
andetubsoquently neglected. When it is remembered that
out -nf the limited number of the British army, 13,800 were
removed, sick or wounded, between the 30th of September
and the 17th of February, the dreadful consequences df
this neglect may be imagined. No faesight, it is said,
could have provided for this large number. Some ships
should, however, have been specially fitted for a service