The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-23 00:00:00

'nod=

.c---S7 -
LONDON, TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 1852.

Throughout the whole of our comments upon the
maritime administration of these islands, we have
never objected to the magnitude of the sums annually
expended by the Admiralty, but have restricted our
condemnation solely to the manner of their distribu-
tion. In no particular would we witness the degenera-
tion of economy into niggardliness. Least of all, in
reference to the Royal Navy of England. Sticklers
as We are for a rational and comprehensive reduction of
the annual expenditure of the country, we should
regard 'with profound sorrow and anxiety the dimi-
nution, to any very considerable extent, of the amount
appropriated to the support of our maritime arma-
ments. What we are solicitous to see done in allusion
to the navy 1* a reform in the general mode of its or-
ganization—not by any means a diminution of the
revenues dedicated to the cost of its government.
Considering the vital importance of maintaining in
fall force and efficiency the national strength
at sea, we were rejoiced, therefore, rather
than dismayed, to observe the ready consent
yielded last night to the naval estimates sub-
mitted to the consideration of the Rouse of Commons
by the present Administration. Votes of moneys to
_u
as
ut ,sBt
amount72relg6u 1
ta/
or
this end for the half-year were earteoactaleedfejd toco
and specified instalments
itch as,.
o ldby
maritime
which, doubled for the twelvemonth
an aggregate of exactly 5,744,322/.1
necessity ofik
taking into account the
power I
strength to an insular Great
Buitain, cannot by any patriotic mind be
viewed as in any way extravagant. All that is
required is—not the reduction of estimates of late years
considerably reduced, but—the more sagacious ap-
plication of the "sinews of war" entrusted to the
Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty. A glance
at the statistical records of the empire during the last
twenty years will sufficiently demonstrate that the
sums expended on the navy have experienced a very
appreciable diminution ; and whilst observing this
circumstance it may not be altogether unadvisable to
remark that the moneys devoted to the sea service pre-
ponderated annually over those applied to the land ser-
vice up to 1841—ever since which time the tables have
. strangely and lamentably enough been turned, the
Army Estimates exceeding the Navy Estimates upon
a gradually increasing ratio. In illustration of
the accuracy of this statement we may remind
the public that in 1827, whereas the Army
required as expenditure of 6,414,7271., the Navy de-
manded no less than 7,876,6831. In 1830 again,
while 5,309605/. were devoted to the Army,
6,991,1631. were awarded to the Navy. Until 1838,
inclusively, the disproportion in the same way was
rendered
yet more perceptible, the Army Estimates
never exceeding 4,700,0001., whereas the Navy
Estimates were during the same interval never
less than 6,400,0001. In 1839 an increase in
the Army expenses began to be perceptible—
the sum devoted to the land fercea for that year
reaching a total of 5,490,2041., while the amount for
the sea forces still extended to an aggregate of
6,542,6621.: in the subsequent year 1840, the Army
Estimates being again 5,597,511/., while the Navy
Estimates were 6,890,267/. From 1841, as we have
already intimated, a change became perceptible,
placing- the total .of the expenses for the mill-
the.' total. of the I
tery 'considerably above