The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-25 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE: SUN.

SIR -ICI your article of !ilia eveliiiig you deprecate
the advice I deemed it my duty to offer with regard to
fur her economy in our Naval Estimates. Yet I cannot
believe we materially differ, since you desite to see our
naval force made thoroughly

There is a source of national weakn* as even more
dangerous than " the ignorant impatience of Taxation,"
and that is patience of official waste on the part of those
who have the opportunities of resisting it. It is an in-
disputable fact that when merch ants want to get a par-
ticular sort of ship built in order to perform a givsn
service, they can generally get it for their money, whilst
the very opposite is more near the truth in the case of
tho public acting through the Admiralty. Indeed, if
it were not for the alterations constantly going
on in the bows and sterns of versels—in cut-

ling down some ships, and in lengthening others,
there would hardly be an excuse for ke,ping up large
establishmetas at our seaports, and, perhaps, this is
partly the secret of many of the changes ships undergo.
Whilst many men are on the books in time of peace, if
they did not find an excuse for something to do, reduc-
tions would commence, a thing which all sorts of officials
instinctively hold in horror.
The fact is, we ought to build by contract. This has
been done in some instances with good effect, and ought
to be done in mere, if not in all. White, Ratsey, Green,
and Camper, would soon shame our empirical builders
into a substitution of exact science for rule of thumb.
No doubt, we have our Chatfields (Chatfield, I believe,
designed the Thetis—a beautiful vessel); but owing to
the fatal mistake committed in abolishing the school of
naval architecture which was founded many years
since, it is only of late that advances have been made on
a better system.
The long and short of the matter is this—a sum of
nearly 1,500,0001. is required for ship-building during
this year. I maintain that we ought to have for this sum
a greater number of efficient ships than, judging from
the experience of the past, we are likely to obtain.
One million a year judiciously expended during the past
thirty-seven years would have placed our navy on such
a footing that, with a better system of manning the
navy, we might at this moment fold our arms and defy
the world. Unfortunately, our wisest measures have
been conceived in a panic, and, consequently, many
things have been forgotten which ought to have been
considered. For example, the reserve of steamers
founded by the Government of Sir Robert Peel were,
if lam rightly informed by a late official, built too
small for their engines; and the result was, that the
vessels turned out to be unsuited to the purposes for
which they were required, and it became necessary to
get more. Then, war steamers did not answer, except
as troopships.
Of Keyham you say nothing. That case is absolutely
unanswerable. It is neither more nor less than an abso-
lute waste of a million of money, because a quarter of a
million would have made Millbay rerfect for the same
purpose, and far better situated. In the debate, I was
told that Keyham was a better place for the sham docks,
because Keyham is less exposed, inasmuch as K- yham
is up Haseoaze. This is evidently erroneous. Key ham
is more exposed. Keyham is exposed to attack by a
force operating from the land side, and which would not
enter the port at all, but disembark in Whitaand bay,
the distance being but a few miles, and the route unde-
fended. Millbay, on the other band, would be further
from attack, except seaward, and, as to that danger,
it would be an almost impossible enterprise for a fl et to
attempt to pass the batteries on Diake'a Island, and
other places. Besides, Millbay lies contiguous to the
Victualling-Yard and Marine-barracks, and would, there-
fore, have offered peculiar advantages. 11.wever, it is,
perhaps, now too late to rectify that mistake; and my
oily wonder is why, if it be so urgently necessary to
have steam docks, which no doubt, it is, so small a sum
as 40,0001. is taken this year-552,0001. being the fur-
ther coat. But if we are to avoid such mistakes in future,
it will Le ascribable in the main to the readiness of the
Press in affording opportunities for the discussion of the
views entertained by different persons.
You do not approve of what I said with respect to the
pay of sailors. When I spoke of sailors—able seamen
—serving for IL a-week to find themselves, it was not
intended to be supposed that blue jackets were to scram-
ble for a chance of cooking their provisions, and that
everyman -should have his own store. My remark, as
to what could be done, was merely intended as the
• basis of an estimate. No difficulty is Imud in
,yaciits
—even where sailors actually "find themselves.' The
limit is the gist of my argument. I meant to convey
that, if able seamen can be obtained at IL per week
to " find themselves," mixed crews of able seamen,
second-rates, and youngsters, to the extent of 40,000,
might be obtained for 2,000,000/. a year, and I believe
that proposition is a true one. -
as well as using Hansard,
I canAs tooni;insvaoykitnhgatthwe Press,"helthink I see my way to a
saving of public money, and a mode of improving the
ffiziency of a great national arm, I shall certainly not
• hesitate to avail myself of it, feeling aesurt d
assaultthat,thoutghhan e
aault upon the strongholds of prodigality tied waste
. may easily be made the occasion of c 'pit it jokes,
subject is by no means a Hie to the public.
I ate, Sir, &c.,

J. J. TRELAWNY.

London, March 24, 1852.

E HON. FRED. WIST.---Me
DEATH or THE regret
to announce the death of this venerable gentleman, at his
seat, Culham Court, Berkshire. The Hon. Fred. West was
brother to the last Eirl Delawarr, and was for many years
in Parliament for Denbighshire, and about the Court of
George 111. and IV. By this demise the families of Dela-
warr, Chesterfield, Radnor, Fox Lane, Northwich, Middle-
ton, Biddulph, Bulkeley, &c., will be placed in mourning.
The largest sailing vessel which ever floated on the
Clyde is now lying at the Broomielaw. The H. C. Kidston
measures 1,444 tons, Custom-house measurement, and is in-
tended as a regular trader between Glasgow and Australia,
under the command of Captain Patterson, late of the Mont-
gomery. Her principal dimensions are length, 168 feet:ikT..
breadth, 32 feet; depth, 29i feet. She was Wilt , New
tilaegowi and launched iq Jane, 1851.