The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-24 00:00:00

E VENING,

MARCH 24, 1852.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
TIMES.—The late Board of Admiralty has delivered
itself of a posthumous defence. With very considerable
confidence Admiral Berkeley rose in the House on Mon-
day evening and performed the part of commentator on
the figures which the new Secretary recited. This re-
markable division of labour between those who pre-
pared the estimates and those who adopt them, enabled
the Gallant Member to discharge himself not only of
an exculpatory address, but of a severe invective
against his late censors in general, and the "public
press" in particular. With a modest announcement that
he proposed to " ray something in favour of the late
board," Admiral Berkeley reviewed, first, the case of the
Megmra; next, the subject of the "preserved meats;"
thirdly, the performances of the Admiralty in the trans-
port of troops to the Cape; and, finally, the general re-
sources of the navy as organiz-d by the late board for
the purposes of national defence. With what success he
conducted his argument we can soon qualify the reader
for deciding. " I will begin," said Admiral Berkeley,
" with the case of the Megmra." This " case," as will
be easily recollected, was constituted by the notorious
fact that the steamer in question not only broke down
or became disabled between Dover and Plymouth, but
was so laden as to make her prospects for the voyage
anything but desirable. And what, upon these points,
was Admiral Berkeley's defence? " I think," said he,
"that this has been satisfactorily settled by the late
First Lord of the Admiralty, and Ido not think that
many more words, if any, are necessary on the subject.
I conceive that the answers of my. Right Hon. Friend has
sufficiently disposed of the infamous stories which have
been invented about that vessel." This is what -Admiral
Berkeley said about the Megmra—this and no more. It
is a pity he should have forgotten that before a defend-'
ant can gain a suit he has to convince other persons be-
sides himself. If the Gallant Member really thought the
case "disposed of" in' the opinion of the country, it was
somewhat superfluous that he should take it up again
to " begin with." If he wished to impart his
own convictions to others, he should, have done
something more than merely endorse the imperfect
apology of a fellow defendant. The case, as we
have observed, involved two points—first, the break-
down, and, secondly, the interior arrangements of the
vessel. As there is no kind of doubt about the former
casualty, the latter must furnish the subject of Admiral
Berkeley's allusions in speaking of the " infamous
stories" in circulation. To some of these stories we
contributed considerable currency, and we are bound,
therefore, to maintain their credibility. It was alleged that
the vessel was so overladen and encumbered with heavy
ordnance stores as to present a scene of indescribable
confusion, and to make it highly improbable that the
troops could be lodged with reasonable comfort. For
these statements we relied,fienoes.other sources of in-
formation, en she communication of a. correspondent
-who' published the evidence of his own senses with the
authority of his proper signature. The Rev. William
Buller, rector of the Holy Trinity, Dorchester, avowedly
actuated by motives of public duty, informed the country
through our columns that he had been an eye-witness of
the embarkation of the Rifle Brigade on board the Me-
gmra; that " the store-room and stowage" (we quote
his own words) " were filled with Ordnance stores, so
that no place remained for the arrangement and proper
disposition of the baggage and belongings of the 700
soldiers;" that " Government, at the sacrifice
of men and officers' just claims to consideration, had
made the ship answer a purpose for which it was never
intended ;" and that, in his belief, "much wanton and un-
necessary misery" must inevitably be inflicted on the
troops, even if the consequences did not involve the
"risk of lite to England's best and bravest sons." These
were the facts positively and publicly stated by a gen-
tleman who witnessed the embarkation, and who, we
must presume, had some personal interest in thus ascer-
taining the truth. We leave them to be compared with
Admiral Berkeley's second-hand apology, and to carry
their own weight, observing simply, that nothing is yet
known of the Megfere's ultimate performances, though
we are aware that her passage to Madeira corresponded
as nearly as possible with her passage to Plymouth.
As regards the " break down" of the vessel, which Mr.
Buller describe& as "putting into Plymouth much dis-
abled, with a depth of water in her which her crew had
been engaged the whole night pumping out," we re-
marked at the time that it would be unfair to make too
much of an accident, except in so far as it might exem-
plify a general condition when taken in combination
with other accidents of a similar kind. It was not
simply because the Megmra became disabled, but be-
cause other Government steamers had fared little better,
that attention was drawn to the fact. Oar argument
was wholly derived from general results, as contrasted
with general and reasonable expectations. We observed
that whereas enormous sums had been lavished on the
completion of our steam marine, its first performances,
when put to actual test by the war at the Ceps., had
been very uupromising. "It was said," asserts Admiral
Berkeley, " that the Admiralty were so ignorant of what
they were about that they could not convey troops from
England to the Cape." Nothing of the sort was said.
What was said was, that considering the smallneis of
the exigency as compared with the magnitude of our
establishments, the actual proceedings had been far from
satisfactory. We said that though steamers were only
required at intervals of two or three months to take 700
or 800 troops at a time, these voyages were seldom or
never well performed, and that the Vulcan had done
worse than the Megmra. It will be in everybody's re.
collection, indeed, that this vessel was reported to
have been absolutely lost, and in point of fact she is
again considerably overdue at this very moment. The
Hellespont screw-steamer left the Cape on the 28th of
December and arrived at Plymouth on the 31st of
January; the Bosphorus left on the 3d of February and
arrived on the 3d of the present month; the Windsor, a
sailing vessel of Mr. Green's, left on the 9th of January
and arrived also on the 7th inst.; bat the Vulcan,
though she left the Cape on the 2d of January, has not
made her appearance . yet. It the requireinenta of a
Ketir war so tax our steam resources that one vessel
must be made to do the work of two, and all are left
behind by private merchantmen, what are we to expect
when heavier demands come upon us? This is the
question which was asked, but which Admiral Berke-
lty omitted to answer. With respect to the general
efficiency of our naval.defences, Admiral Berkeley not
only asserted, but "staked his existence" on the fact
that " though the Admiralty did not make any fuss
about their proceedings, they could during all
the- time of the outcry have covered the Chan-
nel from the North Foreland to the Channel
Islands with a fleet of steamers, within signal distance of
each other, in the space of 24 hours." Such is the Gal-
lant Admiral's tardy declaration. We have not the
smallest desire to question a statement which will be
remarkably re-assuring to tho country at large, and
which will doubtless be remembered to some effect in
the debate on Ourdefeeces, bat we really think the " late
Board" might have judiciously made a little more "fuss"
on this special occasion. We can only say at present
that not only the public, but the members of the service
itself, seem utterly unable to comprehend where this
fleet of steamers was to come from. Admiral Bowles,
though formerly in office, "had not the least idea of
such a thing." Admiral Napier was evidently quite as
much in the dark.- Yet, somehow or other, it seems
these invisible steamers, with their invisible engineers,
seamen, and gunners, and all warranted, we presume,
not to break down, were to start forth in scores at a
telegraphic signal. This is, indeed, a " naval reserve"
worth talking about, and the more substantial the vision
is the better will the country be satisfied; but, as the
" late Board" kept the secret so very effectually, and
have only disclosed it gratuitously after all, they cannot
be surprised if the public take some time to "realize"
the fact.
HERALD.—There are some statements which pass
simply from their audacity. They make such a bold
onset, that the auditor is pushed some steps backward
before he has time to recollect himself. Of this class
was an assumption that several leaders of the new Oppo-
sition agreed to put forward in the first debate under tne
new Administration in the Commons—an assumpticn,
the boldness of which was chiefly manifested in this—
that it took for granted that the present House of Com-
mons, being born in July, 1847, could have no know-
ledge of what took place- in the previous House, between
May, 1846, and Jut 0'1847. Let Us show what we mean
by citing two or three passages from Vireo 'of the prin-
cipal speakers in that night's debate. To begin, then,
with Lord John Russell. The Noble Lord; in that de-
bate, used these words:—
" The Prime Minister says, 4 I cannot propose mea-
sures to the present Parliament, because I should be in
a minority.' That is not an unusual position ; but Mi-
nisters who have said that have usually said, It is im-
possible for me to propose those measures with any
prospect of success in the present Parliament. I must
advise the Crown to call another Parliament, and to
that Parliament I must submit the measures I think
right for the country;' but the proposition of the Noble
Lord at the head of the Government, and the proposi-
tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman to-night, is this—
, We are in a minority ; we mean to conduct the whole
business of the country with that minority ; we mean to
go through the session, and when the session is over wae
mean to exercise our own discretion whether we shall
dissolve Parliament or not—it may perhaps be dissolved
in December, and then we shall propound the measures
we think necessary.
" It appears to me, I own, that. here is 1104sonstitue
tional precedent, that there can be no constitutional pre-
cedent, for such conduct as this."
Next, Sir James Graham came to the Noble Lord's
aid, with an exactly similar statement.
Noble
" I had the pleasure of hearing the N said Ear at the
head of the Government iu a late speech of his, when
he said—' I know that I am in an undoubted minority
in the House of Com Mons, and I appeal therefore to the
forbearance of the House.' I deny absolutely that in
the whole course of our Parliamentary history such an
admission was ever made by any Minister, or that any
such appeal for forbearance was ever asked.—(Cheers.)
I challenge any one to point out any such admission, or
any such request, as that mado by Lord Derby.—( Hear,
heat.) I say that a due homage to the representative
system is at variance with such a request—(Hear, hear)
—and that our representative system would be brought
into disrepute if a Government so situated continued in
office, or suffered Parliament to sit an hour longer than
was necessary to provide for the safety and defence of the
country."
And then, thirdly, came another ex-Minister, Mr.
Gladstone. He said:— •
„ I have any fault to find with the Right Hon.
Gentleman's speech, it is that he seems disposed to avoid
recognising that there is somethingimproper and irre-
gular to the constitution in the existence of a Govern-
went which' is in a minority in the Commons."
And again:—
" The point which I desire to bring before the House,
and on which I wish the discussion to be concentred, is,
that this House_noust ti,btain in form and subatence -art
assurance of tho intention of the Govern n 0 to
advise
the Clown to dissolve Parliament as awn ai the Poi-