The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1363.

member would stippott him. The Secretary to the Admi-
ralty declaimed against cheese-paring, but he forgot that
his vocation at one time was that of clipper and parer.
(Laughter.) Having referred to the arguments of Mr.
Newdegiate and Sir James Fergusson in support of the
scheme of fortifications, the hon. member contended that the
works which had proved most difficult to carry at ebasto-
pol, and more recently in America, were earthworks, and
consequently deprecated the expenditure of millions in sur
rounding Portsmouth with fortifications of masonry covered
with iron. Military authorities were not unanimous in re-
gard to them, and when it was said that he (Mr. Osborne)
and his friends stood alone in their opposition to the
scheme, he pointed to the hon, and gallant officer opposite
(Sir F. Smith), who had served In every hemisphere with
distinction, and to his hon. and gallant friend the member
for Westminster, both of whom withheld from it their
approval. The country might now lie apathetic on the
matter, but the time would come when it would inquire for
itself, and point to those fortifications, not as a monument of
the wisdom, but as a monument of the folly of the House of
Commons of the day. (Hear.) They were called upon in a
time of peace, when we were on terms of friendship with
the Emperor of the French, and when America was ex-
hausted, to adopt preceutions which they had never been
called upon to do in a time of danger. (Hear.) He grudged
nothing that might be wanted for the navy ; but having '
strengthened the army and raised the volunteers, the vote
for whom might be much better devoted to the sustentation
of the regular army, for his idea of volunteers was that
t hey should pay for themselves, and not call upon the coun-
try; but having done all that, he should protest against a
scheme of fortifications which was as extravagant as it
would be useless. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, I must, in the first place,
defend my hon. friend the member for Hertfordshire from
the extraordinary misconception—l am sure it was not an
intentional misrepresentation—of my hon. friend the mem-
ber for Liskeard, who accused him of anticipating an inva-
sion of this country from America. Now, my hon. friend
said no such' thing, nor said anything that was susceptible
of such an interpretation. My hon. friend said that we
might, by force of events in America, find ourselvesin hos-
tility with the Northern States of America ; that, in that
case, we should have to send our fleet to blockade the coast
of America, or to defend our commerce there, and that in
that case, our fleet being absent, and our protection of the
Channel having ceased, France might be tempted to take
advantage of our position, and prepare to invade the coun•
try. I did not follow the hon. member for Liskeard in the
description which he gave of the services of the hon. and
gallant member who made this motion, whom he repre-
sented as having served in all the hemispheres. How
many there are in this world— (laughter)—he did not ex-
plain, but I am quite sure that whatever their number may
be, my honourable and gallant friend's services did him
credit, (Hear.) Now, eiir, I must look at this motion in
its true meaning and effect. It is nothing more nor less
than a motion to throw out the bill, and to put a stop to all
those works; it is nothing more nor less than a motion to
reverse the decision deliberately come to by this house, and
to act, as I maintain, in opposition to the general sense and
intention of the country. That is a very grave motion, and
my noble friend the member for Marylebone has anticipated
an appeal to the country upon the question. I can assure
him that I should feel perfect confidence in such an appeal,
and I am quite satisfied the verdict of the country would be
for us, and not for him. (Hear.) With regard to the hon.
member for Rochdale, I can only say that I am very much
obliged to him for that part of his speech which related to
me, and he could not do me a greater favour than printing
that speech and circulating it as widely as he can through
every part of the country. Tne hon. member did me honour
which I don't feel I deserved in fact, although I do dose. ve
it in p Ant of intention. He was kind enough to say that
the whole system of improved defences of the country
made in the last few years was owing to me. Well, Sir, I
am pre ud of that praise, for praise I consider it to be ;
but, at the same time, although Ido admit that have
laboured from the period he mentions, 1844 or 1845, to
convince this country and the house, that we were in an
inadequate state of defence, yet no one man, however right
he might have been in his opinion, could have succeeded
in producing the general and almost universal conviction
which has prevailed on the subject, and the great results
that have been accomplished, if ho had not—l had al-
most said, followed, but certainly been accompanied by the
general sense of the country and Parliament in the mat-
ter. The real credit of awakening the country to a sense
of its want of protection is due to the late Duke of Wel-
lington, and when the hon. member quoted the Duke of
Wellington against a system of fortifications, he forgot
his celebrated letter to Sir John Burgoyne. In that
letter be called upon the country, by every motive that
ought to influence a nation, to increase and improve our de-
fences. In 1845, when unfortunate differences took place be-
tween this country and France, Portsmouth was in a totally
defenceless state, and all the guns we had were a few
mounted on batteries for salutes, whilst at Cherbourg there
were eight large steamers capable of carrying from 1,200 to
1,500 men each, which might have run into Portsmouth,
destroyed everything there, and have escaped without dan-
ger to themselves. Our army was then insufficient, and as
to our fleet, I remember seeing the old Collingwood, a 72-
gun ship, lying at Spithead—in fact, the only one lying
there—and that because she was detained, instead of carry-
ing Admiral Seymour to the Pacific—to show that we had
a channel fleet--(laughter)—and, in addition, we had only
two vessels to protect Gibraltar and Malta and our interests
in the Mediterranean. That state of things was induced
from a feeling of security arising from our great success in
the late war. There was at that time no likelihood of any
rupture with any foreign Power, and there was a desire on
the part of this house and the country to economise as much
as possible. I thank the bon. member for saying that I was
much to blame for inducing the house to establish the
militia. I certainly urged that our dockyards should be
protected, and I am convinced that this house never did a
wiser thing, or one more conducive to public interest, than
by their agreeing to that proposition. But hon, members
talk big and boldly, and vapour about the impossibility of
invasion, and appear to speak of it as nonsense. (Hear,
hear.) Some persons tell us, and the hon. member for
Rochdale amongst the number, how they would deal with
invasion. The latter hon. gentleman advises that a certain
number of riflemen should dig pits in the sand, and thereby
withstand the guns of any number of ships that might be
brought to bear against them. But it is well known 'hat
amateur performers, though good ie one thing,cannot succeed
in every hing. I admit the hon. gentleman met with emi-
nent success as an amateur diplumatist, and the country is
very much indebted to him for his exertions as such—(hear
and laughter) —but cion't let him fancy he can be as equally
uccessful as an amateur general. America shows us an
example of the danger attending the entrusting of our safety
to amateur generals. The notion of America is—that is in
the Northern States—that any man taken from any profes-
sion, provided he puts on a uniform, a cocked hat, and hada
sword by his side, becomes a general—(laughter)—and the
result is what we know by the last accounts. Hon. mem-
bers who speak of invasion as an impossibility are very much
like the Northern States, who have gone on for the last two
years saying and believing broadly and positively that the
rebellion would be put down in three months-90 days—
ever beginning, but never ending—(laughter)—dud tne con-
sequence is that, instead of their now being at Richmond,
they are anxiously expecting the possibility of the enemy
being at Washington. (Hear, hear.) And so with the lion,
member for Rochdale ; and I cannot imagine anythingmore
amusing to military men on the Continent than the speeches
that are sometimes made to this house declaring invasion to
bo an utter impossibility. I hope that nobody abroad who
has any control over these matters will be led to act upon
the supposition that that opinion is at all shared by the
country, or those who are responsible for its safety. The
late Luke of Wellington considered invasion possible, and
he surveyed the whole of the south-eastern coast, and told
you at how many points invasion might easily and rapidly
be made. The noble lord then proceeded to refer to this
state of the country in 1854, owing to the application of
steam, and contrasted the means of invasion now with those
that existed in 1804, when it was necessary to bring soldiers
and artillery over in small transports, towed by sailing ves-
sels ; whereas now, with the facilities of steam, assisted by
flat-bottomed boats, constructed for the purpose of lending
on the seashore, it was easier for an enemy to invade a
country than formerly. It is said that an army cannot be
collected in Franc for the purpose of invasion without
our being aware of ie t
—but hon members must bear in mind
that, if a rupture took place between the two countries, our
ambassador and consular agents, as well as our fellow-
countrymen who were scattered over France, would have
to leave that country, and we should have no means of
ascertaining the fact. Allusion has been made to the length
of time it took to land our army in the Crimea—but it must
be borne in mind that that was an army unprovided with
the means of landing now in the possession of other coun-
tries, and especially France. It is, therefore, I contend,
essentially necessary, whether with regard to invasion or
to the support of our navy, that we should protect our ar-
senals from destruction. Even admitting that a body of
20,000 or 25,000 men made such a successful attack and
then surrendered, the destruction of our means of defence
would be a positive gain to the enemy. It was therefore
essential that we should protect our arsenals from a coup de
moan. It is asked why are we afraid of an invasion, for,
supposing 100,000 men were landed on our coasts, have we
not 120,0u0 militia, 150,000 volunteers, and a great number
of regular troops ? True; but they are scattered over the
country, and some time must elapse before we could bring
them together and organise them so as to bring them to
bear on the 100,000 men concentrated at the point of land-
ing; and in the meantime cur dockyards, it left unpro-
tected, would be destroyed, and our naval power crippled for
a very long time. (Hear.) The hon, member for Liskeard
says that the navy is our real defence, and that in time of
war that country which has the largest number of iron-
clads would have the command of the shoes of the other.
Hive we a superior iron-clad fl tat ?—(hear, hear)—or are
we likely to have one? (Hear, hear.) So far from that
Luis house has opposed our building any more wooden
ships to be covered with iron, similar to those used by
other countries, and has decided that we shall wait until
we can ascertain the best construction for iron ships.
When, however, we again come to this house for money
to construct such ships, I hope the hon. member and the
house generally will not object to vote the money. (Hear.)
It has also been said, and I quite agree in the opinion, that
the navy, as a means of defence, cannot be overrated; but

when completed there must be soldiers ready to man them,
and if not completed they would not involve that necessity.
Whatever state they were in, he considered that inland
forts ought to be stopped. He offet ed no opinion on torts
commanding the sea, that was a matter of engineering
skill and the judgment of artillerymen, and he deferred to
the balance of authority on that neuter. The hot, gentle-
man having referred to the grand scheme for a central
arsenal, in the course of which ho expressed a hope that no
land had been purchased for it, said that inland forts ought
to be stopped unless her Majesty's Government could show
him, on some better authority than he yet had, that they
were required. The amendment had been brought forward
from the Opposition side of the haze by an hon. and gal-
lant member, who was a very high authority on engineer-
ing and fortifications, and he (Mr. Cobden) looked upon the
scheme of fortifications brought forward by her Majesty's
Government as one calculated to inflict the most permanent
wound—he used the word advisedly—upon the reputation
and good fame of the so-called Liberal party. They were
there to vote these fortifications at the instance of the noble
lord alone. Everybody admitted it, and without saying a
word in justification of it, every member on the Liberal
side of the house shrugged his shoulders and avoided the
question as much as possible. (Hear, and laughter.) They
were laying down a great scheme of fortifications that would
require an enormous amount of armed force to render them
safe or useful—(hear, hear)—because they must man theta
to protect them from a coup de main of the enemy. (Hear,
hear.) He put it to the great Liberal party in that house
whether they were acting wisely in allowing themselves to
be identified with this measure at the instance of the noble
lord. He should not trouble the house with any remarks
on the details of the plan, and he thanked them for giving
him an opportunity of entering his earnest but ample: pro-
test against the undertaking. Hear, hear.)
Sir J. FERGUSSON said, if the policy of the Govern-
ment had not been over and over again approved of by the
country, the House would never have arrived at that
stage at which that subject had been taken up that day.
He contended that the country approved of the scheme,
believing that when it was carried out it would prove a
great saving of public money, especially in time of public
emergency ; and he urged that much of Lord Palmerston's
popularity was attributable to the determination of the noble
lord to fortify our arsenals and strengthen our coast defences.
It was extraordinary that the hon. member for Rochdale
should have quoted Pitt against a system of fortifications,
when Pitt was an advocate for both land and sea defences.
The hon. gentleman then proceeded to argue that forts were
found of great advantage to Russia in the Crimea, and he
pointed out the analogy between Spithead and Charleston
with regard to defences.
Col. DICKSON for once found himself in agreement
with the hon member for Rochdale. He believed a foreign
invasion of this country, especially a French invasion, was
utterly impossible, and therefore, in presence of the distress
both in England and Ireland, he should consider the pro-
proposed expenditure not merely wasteful but criminal.
Mr. C. BERKELEY pointed out that there was a dis-
crepancy of £60,000 between the estimated expenditure on
the proposed works as stated last year and the estimate now
laid upon the table, and he called upon the noble lord a, the
head of the Government to account for the fact.
Lord FERMOY believed that when the people were ap-
pealed to, it would be found that many hon. members who
thought they were ensuring for themselves popularity by
supporting this vote, had reckoned without their host. In
his opinion aFrench invasion was a mere panic,and assuredly
it would never take place unless England pursued a course
of policy that isolated her from the other nations of Europe.
Mr. NEWDEGATE would support the second reading
of the bill, but only on condition that the scheme for erecting
a great arsenal in the middle of England was given up.
Sir E. COLEBROOKE said it was a mistake to suppose
that the hon. and gallant member for Chatham was op-
posed to every form of fortifications. What he had opposed
was the extravagant extent to which it was proposed to carry
them out in the present instance. It was upon this ground
that he. himself had opposed, on a former occasion, the
scheme; and he thought the Government would smooth the
way for the bill if they frankly stated how far they were
prepared to meet the views of the hon. and gallant gentle-
man opposite.
Lord C. PAGET said he was not at all surprised that the
hon. member for Rochdale should take exception to the
scheme of fortifications proposed by her Majesty's Govern-
ment. He had himself every year to deal with the very able
and strenuous opposition of the honeeentleman to everything
connected with putting our navy inefficient
COBDEN—I opposed waste.] ,He did not order. [Mr.
recollect any occa-
sion on which the gist of the hon. member's observations
was not to the same effect as that night. He was sure the
hon. member was as great a patriot
as
any
yoneof themselves,
but his patriotism was of a peculiar character. He believed
his hon. friend stood alone in by an hen member
the course pursued by
the Government was approved ?
opposite, what was the best proof thaitt
was this--that they
they never heard of any
the countdry in his opinions on
these matters. Bat, as had been observe
never heard of any panics now ;
had taken the precaution
the last few years the Governmentour shores. Let them turn
of looking to the defences
joaifs
Government had benefitted
squadron coming over to insult this country, because for
to the question whether t
by steam or not. No introduction
d since the
the country had increaserapidly
by his noble
of steam ; but, as had often been stated one could deny that the power of
friend at the head of the Government, the introduction
two principles were perfectly com •
inva-
sion than before.
The
s of steam, however powerful the
patible. In these
days be, a blow might be struck
fleet of the country
place. It was this that had led the
of steam also rendered the country. more liable to
upon an unexpected
more secure, irrespective of our
parts of our
Government andeetthce
oedue.otountry to make some of the princi-
palbe drawn aside to protect the colonies
fleet,
which
mightf the empire ; so that it became necessary
or a distant part °
and other important places safe against
a coup de mate had great respect for the opinions of the
hon. and gallant member for Chatham, and he would not
to have Portsraoilutehh
now discuss with him whethertheforts
should be larger or
smeller; but this he would say, that
when a scheme
of fortifications
WAS idle to ask the house to chip a bit
Ortifications had been recommended by
eminent engineere -.
anTthgeehnotlne.maannd
agpaplleanaret
dgetontfloermgeatnthhaatd,
were to complete the larger works
hill they should abandon the Hillsea lines;
on Portadown
there wasnothingto prevent a body
but the hon. and g
asawidaythhaetr eevaenudjoigh
and resolute men from landing from a squa-
dron,sanction the cheeseparing policy of the hon
of intelligent
in these days of steam'
turn the line of the forts. He trusted the
protilleetee fortifications, 'erla.;iiihey
might
If the a d
tlemrt. men meets were carried, it
and gallant gent
e Govern t
hous e whooulrod
men and completely ember-
would embarrass
Mr. aIONSELL said that one would be led to infer from
of the noble lord that these who did not
the observations
as the Government
take the same viewswere opposed to the
dockyards. The only difference of opinion be-
The question of steam was not what they had to
eefence o
rasa the wihooulre
was as to the moat efficient way of securing that
tween them
object. t effect would be produced
discuss, but wha _ by the largest
number of iron-clad vessels. If this country had the greatest
number of iron-clad vessels she woulu have the invading
country at her reereY, and.would be able to destroy all the
preparations for invasion.
(Hear.) It appeared to him that
it was not at Portsmouth
the defence was required, but at
and Toulon. Anybody who would take the
Cherbourg
trouble to read the correspondence of the first Napoleon
would see hew idle it WAS to suppose that an invasion could
take place in these days of iron-clad ships. It would be better
to have half aa
dozen iron•cl
to this d vessels as floating batteries
than to have recourse antiquated system of fortifica-
tions, which was the mere idiosyncracy of an individual.
support the amendment.
He H would
Mr. PULLER said there were two questions that the
house had to decide—first, whether, under existing circum-
stances, the invention of steamboats afforded reason to ap-
prehend an invasion from France ; and secondly, if it did,
whether the Government fortifications would be the proper
means of meeting the emergency. There had been much
talk about an expression of the late Sir R. Peel as to bridg-
ing the Channel by the invention of steam, but the question
was, when the Channel was bridged, who would have the
most soldiers to send across the bridge. The future could
never be estimated by the present, and as an instance of
that he would cite the United States army, which four years
ago wad as nothing compared with European armies, but
which had now become a great military power. (Hear.)
Supposing, for instance, that the Americans, after settling
their own affairs, should declare war against us, the British
navy would be employed in blockading the American ports,
and who could say that (supposing the present Emperor
removed) the French would not take advantage of the state
of affairs, and throw a force into this country ? The true
defence of England was her navy, and especially her iron-
clad ships, and the only reproach to England was that she
was always unready when first called upon.
Colonel SYKES said be had before condemned the
proposed vote as impolitic, inglorious, unnecessary, and
degrading to Englishmen. He had thought it an insult
to the national character to suppose that British soldiers
would wish to be put behind stone walls in case of an inva-
sion, and further investigation of the circumstances had
not led him to alter his opinion. It was possible that 100,000
men might land upon our coasts, and bring with them
30,000 horses; but, though they might make an imposing
figure, there would be an increase in the defences immedi-
ately, and if the 30,000 horses should be left for three days
without fresh hay—which, of course, would be all: burnt
within 50 miles round at once—the whole force would be
disabled. With regard to the fortifications at Portsmouth
they would require 30,000 men to man them, and that num-
berl could with difficulty be spared. The hon. and E la nt
gentleman concluded by calling attention to what gland
had
but
had done not many years ago, when the population as
15,000,000, whereas it was now over 20,000 ,000 » nd, of
course, proportionately stronger.
Mr. B OSBORNE thought the house had exer iced a
wise discretion in separating the forts of Spithead f m the
general question of fortifications before them. It as said
the cost would be £12,000,000, but when they came o arm
the forts nobody could say that it would not be £2O, 0000
(Hear, hear.) Was the house then, he asked, which rained
at the Brompton gnat, now prepared to swallow the Ports-
mouth camel ? (Hear, and laughter.) The hon, ember
for Hertfordshire had imparted a new feature into he de-
bate. He threatened them with invasion from A erica;
and, judging from its absurdity, hewas quite convin ed that
if the noble lord had proposed to fortify Hertford the hon.

how can we maintain the efficiency of that navy in time of ' Executive the power of carrying out that principle
war if our arsenals have been destroyed by the enemy? in any manner and to any extent It pleases. As
(Hear, hear.) The opinions of naval and military men have soon as a sum of money is expended 1"../r any parti-
been quoted a,tainst the scheme; but it was very easy to get eu Jar wot kit is perfect ly vain to attempt to step it.
opposite opinions in all natters, whether connected with You may show, most convincingly, that e,very tar'
arts or sciences. Her Majosty's Government, however,have thing spent will be thoroughly wasted, nay, rilat it
taken the advice of those whom we consider competent men, A, •II contribute to injure the very purpose whichthe
and in whom we have the utmost confidence; and upon the House of Commons had in view in voting the ex-
advice contained in the report of the Royal Commission we venditure. It dots not matter; the great mdtwity
have acted; and we consider, notwithstanding what has of the house, and the great majority of the pub,lic,
been said to the contrary, that the series of fortifications we too, shudder at the thought of admitting that an.
propose are essential for the defence of the country. (Hear.) expenditure has been useless, and of, as they coh-
I therefore hope the house will not be led away by the mo. cider, making it so. They will throw good money'
tion of the hon. and gallant member, and reverse a formal after bad; they will not acknowledge a mistake, and.
decision already come to, and upon which we have acted. put en end at once to abed specuLation ; they insist
So far from this proposition being a disgrace to the Liberals, on making somet hie gof it, and are satisfied, in the
I feel confideuc that the people are with us, and I should tong run, to have a work worth, say, a thousand
have no fears for the result of an appeal to the country on pounds, if a hundred thousand are expended every
the question. The people of this country insist on being year to keep it up, to show for a million they have
kept secure from attack. We know we have seen constant expended. So the Fortifications Bill was /Tag a.
rovulsions of opinion from panics, and the hon. member for second time last night by an overwhelming majority..
Rochdale, who has written a pamphlet on panics, ought Sir Frederic Smith gave very good reasons not only
to be the last man to oppose that which is likely to prevent for his amendment, but t gainst all the works for
their recurrence. The country depends upon being de- which money is asked, but the reason, were urged in
fended, and it was for the sake of security that 150,000 men vein. "We have bought the lard," said the G tvern-
volunteered to take up arms, and from a feeling that inva- men*, "we have built the foundations. The country
sion was not a bugbear. (Hear.) I hope the house will Fill be saddled wish a debt to no purpose if you do'
resist the motion of the hon. and gallant member. (Hear.) not allow us to complete them." The argument was
The house divided-- irresistible. Sir Frederic Smith showed that 11.11 f
Ayes 132 the money which will he needed to complete the:
Noes 6l fortifications would, if expended upon the navy,.
Majority
The result was received with some manifestations of ap- forts when built would cost an enormous sum to
please. keep them up, and when kept up at this sacrifice
The bill was then read a second time would do more harm than good. The house was as
AUGMENTATION OF BENEFICES BILL. usual penny wise and pound foolish ; it could not
Lord PALMERSTON moved the second reading of this sacrifice the money paid for the foundation and the'
premiums paid for the land, and went boldly on for
an expenditure of several millions which not a soul
believes necessary, and nine out of ten are COW-
vinced is mischievous. Another reason for the over-
whelming majority which this project of the Go-
vernment obtained is in some respects honourable to
the House of Commons. Th. 3 vast majority are
anxious to see the country insnk ed against attack ;
they are prepared in the name of tLeir constituents,
whom they fairly represent in this reatter, to incur
any expense necessary for effecting this object.
Bnt they distrust their own judgment ; they are
unwilling either to take the trouble or incur the
responsibility of examining the scheme of the
Government, and of rejecting it. The Govern-
ment, they say, is responsible. If we give what it
asks, we escape all reproach and we save ourselves
all bother. Lord Palmerston says the forts are ne-
cessary. He is at the head of the Government andl
ought to know. Let us vote this money for the forts,.
and if they do not answer the purpose the fault will
be his, not ours. That particular kind of reasoning
did not find expression in the debate, but it had a
very powerful influence as well upon those who voted
as on those who stayed away. A phrase invented by
Lord Palmerston always does very effective duty
whenever the question of fortifications is rrised.
Nearly twen'y years ago the noble lord, with more
levity than truth, declared that steam had bridged the,
Channel, and any time within the last five years this
"steam bridge" has formed the burden of the song
of the advocates of fortification. The public has
forgotten the reply which, as Mr. Cobden reminded.
the house last night, Sir It Peet made to this smart
saying—" There are two parties who can play at
making these steam bridges." Steam has certainly
done nothing for France which it has not done for
England in far greater degree. If it has given her
he means of moving a large force quickly to a de-
termined point, it has given us the means of making
a smeller force do duty over a much larger area. If
-he French, encamped at Boulogne with the design
of invading England, could, thanks to steam, cross
quickly, and in the teeth of unfavourable winds,
our English Channel fleet could move with equal
speed towards the point of coast threatened, and
reinforcements from all our dockyar s could gather
there. The experience of the Crimea has shown, as
Sir F. Smith observed, that it is a most difficult
thing to land a large body of men even with favour-
able weather. With that advantage it took the
allies five days to land a force upon the coast of the
Crimea, which would only land upon the English
coast, assuming the landing were unopposed, to
meet certain and immediate destruction. So long as
the navy is maintained in a proper condition any
invasion of our shores is impossible. The forts are
needless to prevent invasion if a strong navy is
maintained; they are not needed if we have such a
navy to defend the dockyards, and it is very doubt-
ful whether if the defence of the dockyards is left
to them they can ensure it. It is all very well to
talk of American exptriences and to quote Charlea-
tou in favour of Spithead, but there is not the
slightest similarity between the two cases. The
entrance at Charleston harbour was blocked up by
obstructions of all kinds, which left the attacking
vessels marks for the guns of the forts. We, as Sir
F. Smith said, have a navy of our own, and cannot
afford to lay down torpedoes which would prevent
it from using our harbours. And not only will these
forts be useless, they will be serious encumbrances.
They will require so large a force to garrison them
that our army available to meet the invading force
will be reduced to a few regiments. We shall be so
occupied with the defence of Portsmouth and Ply-
mouth, and half a dozen other places, which the
enemy would never dream of attacking, that we
shall leave him the road to London quite free.

Mr. BARNES moved that the bill be read a second time
that day two months.
The house divided. The numbers were—
For the second reading 179
Against 29
Majority for

The bill was read a second time.
The Alkali Works Regulation Bill, as amended, was
considered and agreed to.

The Salmon Fisheries (Ireland) Bill, as amended, was
considered and agreed to.
The Promissory Notes and Bills of Exchange, the Rail..
way Clauses, and the Sydney Branch Mint Bills were read
a second time.

The Greenwich Hospital (Provision for Widows) and
the Court of Session (Scotland) Bills were pissed through

committee.
The Companies' Clauses Bill was withdrawn.
The Misappropriation by Servants Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Other bills were advanced a stage, and the house was
counted out at ten minutes to two o'clock.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

... .

MANCHESTER-JULY 9.

At our market this morning there was a tolerable at-
tendance. Of English wheat there was a limited supply,
and can scarcely be quoted cheaper, while American met a
slew sale, at a reduction of 2d to 3d per 100 lb. Flour in
limited request, at 6d per sack and barrel under the rates of
last week. Oats and oatmeal, with only a moderate busi-
ness, were the turn in favour of buyers. Beans and In-
dian corn in limited requeat at late values.