The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-06 00:00:00

duly seasoned by pickle extracted from " obsolete"

old junk. His intention was no doubt vry
able, but not so his conclusions. His a. imadver-
sions on the waste occasioned by the s 3 stem pur-
sued in our dockyards were just, but 'Acre devoid of
novelty. How indeed could he have shed novelty
on a matter so often investigated before but not cor-
rected, for reasons it were needless now to inquire
into. Mr. COBDEN'S proposition to reduce the
number of men just voted, seventy-six thousand,
may be very wise as a matter of economy,
but not so as one of prudence. It is
far easier to drill a soldier than to make
a seaman—the one may be taught in a month
or two, but it will take two or three years
to make a good seaman, and even more than that.
A soldier may soon learn his steps, but it will take
a long time before a sailor gets his sea legs
—run aloft, or reef a topsail in a gale of wind. It
is not even every smart seaman that can take a
weather-earing in a stormy night. But though
we may excuse a landsman for going out of
his reckoning in hazy weather, yet Mr.
COBDEN had better have kept more in
soundings than have hazarded so far beyond his
depth. He made charges against Sir JOHN
PAKINGTON that were quite at sea as to their cor-
rectness. Indeed, Lord CLARENCE PAGET justified
the late Board of Admiralty for their patriotic and
praiseworthy endeavours to restore, if not to recon-
struct, the Navy. To Sir JOHN PARINGTON belongs
the merit of originating the first great iron ship—
the Warrior—and in asking Parliament for a vote
for that purpose Sir JOHN said that he did not dis-
guise from the house the fact that the expense would
be the greatest ever yet laid out in building a
man-of-war.

Now, as to reducing the number of men, we think
the Admiralty have acted wisely in resisting that
proposal, bearing in mind the result of our insane
conduct at the end of the great war in discharging
the best of our seamen, and so spreading disgust in
the service. What was the consequence of that un-
grateful proceeding? Wily, that most of the prime
old seamen so discharged went over to America—
took service in their navy—were welcomed with
delight, and taug it the "saucy Yankees"
how to capture our English frigates !
Would Mr. COBDEN repeat that suicidal lesson
now ? We belieae net. He is too patriotic for
that, and only hazards opinions beyond his own
knowledge, thinking he is consulting the interest
of the country. Some things that may appear
cheap and economical often turn out to be very
dear, and ingratitude to our gallant seamen is one
of them, indeed, the dearest economy ever pur-
chased by a nation whose real salvation depends on
her naval power and efficiency. " Our tight
little island," which the sailor exulted
in while singing in jovial mood, is no
longer so safe with our hearts of oak
as of old, for now steam supersedes
both wind and tide, as iron promises to deal with
our wooden walls of glorious memory as relies of the
past. And, indeed, the present time, however peace-
able things may appear, is not so settled as to war-
rant the reduction of men who have been trained at
a heavy cost, and worth ten times their number of
landsmen for a naval emergency. Europe is now
heaving in commotion though overawed by military
force, or restrained by prudent counsel, and it were
unwise to reduce a body of men on whom our very
safety and independence may depend.
With respect to one charge, amongst many,
made against the Government of Lord DERBY, we
will let Sir JOHN PARINGTON speak for himself
in regard to the Navy :—" The hon. member referred
to that Treasury minute which my noble friend re-
ferred to in his speech, and what did he say as re-
garded that minute ? He said that the drawing up
of that Treasury minute by Lord DERBY'S Govern-
ment was a ' good party move.' I repeat that a
charge more unfounded was never made in this
house. At the time that the committee which
drew up that minute was appointed it was ail
secret committee to consider a matter of
mere detailed arrangements for the purposes
of the Government, and that committee
drew up a report for the instruction of the Govern-
ment under these circumstances. I found it my
duty, in considering the state of the navy in 1858-59,
and I proposed to the Cabinet tnat we should have
a very large addition to the aarount of the votes to
be brought forward for 1859. It was the feeling of
the Cabinet that as we were about to call upon the
house to vote navy estimates then of an almost
unprecedented character we neould not be
justified unless we had the best and clearest
grounds to proceed Off. In the arduous position
which I then occupied I was not disinclined to
make the inquiries, and I drew up papers that
required the opinion of the Government; and to
obtain this an inquiry was made into the whole of
the circumstances upon which we meant to proceed.
That paper which followed was drawn up solely
for the advice and guidance of the Government.
At the time that committee was appointed, and at
the time that they made their report, I state broadly
and distinctly that it was not the intention of the
Administration that that paper should ever go be-
yond those who ordered that committee. There
was not the slightest intention to make it public,
and therefore I appeal to the hon. member whether
he is just in saying that it was a party move."
And further on Sir JOHN declared that it was dur-
ing a subsequent debate on the state of the Navy,
when this document was referred to, he said that
though it was only meant as a confidential "minute"
produced by a committee of four Ministerial mem-
bers, yet as it was referred to ty Lord C. PAGET,
the Government of Lord DERBY had no objec-
tion to make that paper a public one ; and it
was under these circumstances that the " minute"
was laid before Parliament. But it was not only
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON, but other members, and,
among them, Sir CHARLES WOOD, who said
ak e 8 1 o_a provef fault uit
that Mr. COBDEN, in his anxirty:
t
enough, had committed many
very natural with an advocate who proves too
much, and thus over does the thing. One good may
result from this re-open;ng of a question so impair.
tant to the nation, that it will now make the Ad-
miralty tr.l their Board in some better order, and so
make our naval administration more ship-shape than
it has been in for the last fifty years at least. But
in our laudable endeavours for economy, we must
take care not to spoil the navy for a halfpenny's
worth of tar.

The news from Poland by no means con-
firms the confident anticipations of Russirin
officials, or rather the sanguine hopes expressed by
them in public. There is good reason to believe
that soon after the first outbreak of the insurrec-
tion the Russian Government awoke to the percep-
tion of the danger ; and the course of events has
certainly not tended to re-assure them. True, tele-
, grams and despatches continually inform us of the
rout of the insurgents, the indifference of the great
body of the people, the easy triumph of the
Russians, and the numbers of the enemy slain and
captured. Facts, however, speak differently.
Notwithstanding this boasted Russian valour ant
superiority, # threatened attack on the town of Kn-
lisch has thrown the Russian garrison into a panic
They are under arms day and night, the infantr)
h guard the gates and the cavalry patrol the neigh-