The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-24 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 24, 1863.

lament the cause of reduction as much as I do. It is due to
the great decrease in the manufacture of sails, which, to the
regret of all lovers of sailing, have given way to coals. In
the vote for naval stores there is, I may add, a decrease of
£410,133 for timber alone. We have at last got a stock of
timber worthy of the country, there being no less than
£112,000 worth of old timber on our hands at this moment—
a position which I do not believe we were ever in before.
In the Controller's department we ask for a less sum this
year by £200,380, because so far as engines are concerned
there is at present no necessity for any large demand. Upon
the contracts for ships we ask for a considerably less sum
than last year, and, moreover, we do not propose any new
construction of iron ships in the coming year ; but at alater
period I will explain what we are doing in that respect. The
next vote upon which there is a decrease is upon vote 11,
for New Works. I see the hon. member for Portsmouth
(Sir J. Elphinstoue) in his place, and I confess I expect
some complaint from him with regard to what I am now
about to mention. The fact is that, in deference to the opi-
nion of this house, the Admiralty have seriously thought
whether they ought or ought not to construct large works
at Portsmouth. Undoubtedly, before I or whoever may
occupy my position asks a vote for this purpose it would be
requisite to lay before the house full and detailed plans,
showing the whole cost of the works. We do not intend to
do so this year. The fact is, we found at the eleventh hour
it was necessary to pass a private Act of Parliament in order
to enable us to commence the works, though I had sup-
posed, as the property belonged to the Admiralty, we might
at once have proposed a sum to the house; bat when we dis-
covered our mistake, it was too late to comply with the
standing orders, and therefore the amount we intended to
ask was erased from the estimates. But, sir, we proceed vigo-
rously at Chatham. (A laugh.) The noble lord (Lord R.
Montagu) will, I hope, now give me credit for great anxiety
in pushing forwards the works at Chatham, and accordingly
we shall do as much work there during the next year as we
possibly can. We therefore propose to take for the works at
Chatham as large a sum as we can expend. We likewise pro-
pose to take a considerable sum for the new long dock at
Malta, in addition to the dockyard. The Maltese authorities
have been in communication with the Imperial Government,
and they have proposed to contribute a portion of the
expenses for the works which we intend to construct at the
head of the great harbour. I will be ready by and bye to
give further explanations on this subject. But, Sir, there is
a public work which the Admiralty has not ceased to desire,
inasmuch as it is one which will be absolutely necessary at
some future time. If in the event of war you mean to have
your naval business conducted with vigour and despatch, it
will be necessary to have the Admiralty officers amalga-
mated and brought under one roof, That matter has been
under the consideration of her Majesty's Government. We
volunteered to go to Somerset-house, but we found that the
alterations necessary would cost a great deal, and I am
sorry to say we do not as yet ask for any sum for that pur-
pose, important as the measure is. Now, having given a
general sketch of the principal items of decrease intheNaval
Estimates for the coming year, the Committee will permit
me to give some account of the numerous details of various
branches, and, first of all, with regard to the construction
of ships. Sir, I have laid upon the table of the house the
usual annual return of the number of steamships afloat and
building, and as the return is rather a long one I will not,
unless it be desired, go through its details, bat will shortly
state we have now under construction and at sea 21 armour
plated vessels. (Hear, hear.) I will endeavour to show
how soon the ships under construction will be ready for
sea, and the progress we intend to make in the further con-
struction of iron-cased ships. The house is aware that we
have at this moment at sea the Warrior, the B lack Prince,
the Defence, and the Resistance. They have been tried
under various circumstances, and I am happy to assure the
Committee the reports concerning them are very satisfac-
tory. They are all good sea boats. One of them, which
was very much criticised last year—the smaller one—the
Resistance, has proved herself the fastest of the whole. Now,
smaller ships have various advantages over larger ones;
and in saying this I do not mean to detract from the
merits of the Warrior, the child of my right hon. friend
(Sir J. Pakington). I believe the hon. member for Tyne-
mouth has seen them at Lisbon.
Sir J. PAKINGTON—What is the speed of the Resist-
ance ?
Lord C. PAGET—Her speed is 111 knots an hour; but
the trials that hayed been made have been principally with
a view to try their going in a circle, their action with respect
to pitching and rolling, and their general sailing qualities.
Those ships had just returned from their cruise to Lisbon.
The Royal Oak will probably be ready for sea in May, and
the Prince Consort in June. Both these vessels are wooden
line -of-battle ships converted into armour-plated, and above
4,000 tons. The Hector, an iron ship of intermediate size
between the Warrior and the Resistance class, will be ready
for sea in July. I do not say that all these ships will be com-
missioned as soon as they are completed; my object is to
show when they will be ready. (Hear.) The Caledonia,
another of the wooden line-of-battle ships converted, will
be ready in September. And now we come to a novel class
of ship. The house will remember that for some time it
was supposed that no ship would be able to carry armour-
plates unless one of a very large tonnage. It was, however,
\
undoubtedly most desirable that we should have vessels of
somewhat less tonnage, and less costly, but still able to
bear armour-plates. Mr. Reed, now Chief Constructor of
the Navy, was employed by the Admiralty to carry out the
construction of ships of this class, and he was ordered to
build time—the Enterprise, the Research, and the Favou-
rite. The Enterprise is to have a wooden bottom—that is
to enable her to go to distant stations, but she will carry
very heavy guns, and will be entirely armour-plated in the
middle and along her topsides, so that, although she cannot
attempt to resist shot, we believe shells will not have the
same deadly effect on her as on wooden ships. These three
ships are much of the same nature. The Enterprise will be
ready by Oct., the Research in Feb., IR
—64, and the Favourite
in June, 1864. The Royal Sovereign will be ready in Nov.

The Enterprise is a Yeasel of 990 tons, and the other two,
the Research and Favourite, are respectively of 1,253 and
, •
2,186 tons. The state
....lent with regard to the preparation
of •
must always be a matter of uncertainty. We ha'e
dome admirable constructors of armour plates all over the
cottntr', but questions of difficulty are apt to arise, and it is
better that we should delay our ships than that we should go
on and plate them with insufficient arttlour. (Hear.) While
upon armour plates let me pay honour where honour is due.
We can get good plates, both hammered and rolled, but we
find that the rolled ate more uniform, and Mr. Brown, a
gentleman distinguished by great zeal, and conducting im-
portant works at Sheffield, has been most successful in
producing plates. I may likewise mention Mr. Reed (we
believe) as being very successful in plates. lam likewise
bound to give the Thames Iron Company credit for ham-
mered plates ; but lately, from the cause I have mentioned,
the hammered plates have been considered less successful.
Another point is the annealing, or gradually cooling, pro-
, cess. We tried annealing, and in some cases were successful
and in others we failed. We actually took the same plate
and annealed one half, leaving the other half unannealed,
but the effect in respect to both was very much the same, so
completely are we in a state of uncertainty as to the result
of different processes. We are, however, in good hopes
that we are beginning to know what we are now about,
and that we shall succeed in having a regular supply of
plates. (Hear, hear.) I have already stated that by the
end of the year we shall have altogether, including the
ships at sea as well as those under construction, nine
large armour-plated ships and one small one ready for sea.
In the spring of next year we shall have a great develop-
ment again. We shall then have the Ocean, a wooden line
of battle ship, armour-plated ; the Valiant. sister to the
Hector, an intermediate class between the Sovereign and
Resistance ; the Prince Albert, the second ship on the tur-
ret principle, in which Capt. Coles is to mount six guns ;
and the Achilles, building at Chatham. We hope they will
be afloat and sea-ready almost by April in next year, and
also the Achilles, sister to the Warrior, the Royal Alfred,
and the Zealous. Then, as to small ships, we have two—the
Favourite and the Research, to which I have already
alluded, making in all 18 armour-plated ships ready for sea
by April in next year. Under these circumstances, I hope
the hon. member for Norfolk will admit that we are mak-
ing progress in preparing ships for launching. There are
three extremely large ships of upwards of 6,600 tons each
—namely, the Agincourt, the Minotaur, and the Northum-
berland. When these ships will be ready I cannot pretend
to say, as that matter depends on the contractors. I be-
lieve that they are making great exertions to get the
vessels ready, but, of course, it is not in my power to state
when they will be finished. I will state what we
propose to do with respect to the armour-plated fleet.
We propose to convert another line-of-battle ship,
called the Repulsive, similar to the Zealous and a very
fine ship, and we also propose to prepare frames for
five more large, wooden, armour-plated ships. Having
now a large stock of timber, it is really a matter of economy
that we should construct these vessels in our dock-
yards. Then comes the great question of wood versus
iron. Undoubtedly, when we come to ships of very
large tcnnage, iron has the advantage. Wooden vessels are
subject to great vibration when put to high speed, and time
damaged them and caused them to decay. Wooden vessels
cannot be said to be lasting ; but the committee should
remember that we, after all, are not worse than other
nations which are building wooden ships, and there-
fore it is advisable that, having a good stock of timber on
hand, we should construct a certain number more of these
ships. Hon. gentlemen—mercantile gentlemen will, I know,
say, build them of iron; and it may happen shortly that
some one will give us the means of keeping their bottoms
clean. In consequence of their fouling they are not so use-
ful as wooden ships, as long as the latter last. The Con-
troller of the Navy will tell you that if you are to have iron
ships you ought almost to have one dock for every ship.
We are covering our iron ships' bottoms with paint of every
description, and there is actually a trial being made to
enamel them. We are endeavouring to get over the difficulty
arising from the fouling on the bottoms in every possible
way, feeling that as long as that mischief exists we must
think that for many purposes wooden vessels are superior to
iron. As an argument in favour of iron vessels, I may say
that Admiral Robinson, the Controller of the Navy, has
gone very carefully into the average cost to the country of
maintaining a wooden fleet, and he has come to the conclu-
sion that for every man that you vote for your navy you
must put down £lO for the mere wages of artificers to keep
the ships in repair. Thus, supposing you have 76,000 men,
the wages for artificers for keeping the ships in repair would
amount to £760,000 a year. Ido not mean to say whether
this calculation is right or wrong, but hon. gentlemen have
the power to judge of these matters for themselves because
there is annually laid on the table of the House a detail of
the cost of every ship in the navy. I still avoid stating ex-
actly what is to be the armament of any ship, because I do
not think that any one could give a proper opinion as to
what will be the armament. (Hear.) Great experiments
are going on. Mr. Whitworth says that he can make a gun
capable of sending a projectile through anything; while
others pretend that ho cannot. But we have this consola-
tion in regard to all the ships we are building, that they can
carry thicker plates if necessary. Before I quit this subject
of ships I wish to say, speaking entirely on my own responsi-
bility, that I believe an invention is coming out which will
produce a great reform in the masting of vessels.
Captain Coles, who is well known as a very clever and in•
genious officer, has invented a system of masting which will
altogether do away with rigging. This system consists in
having an iron cylinder for the mast,' supported by two
other cylinders. If this invention succeeds it will prevent
the mast falling so as to foul the screw. This has not been
tried yet, but I mention the matter, in order to show we
are anxious to take advantage of every invention. I think
I have now made the committee acquainted as well as I am
able with the progress of our ship-buildingloperations.
There is a certain number of small ships likewise building
which are really not of surpassing interest at the present
day in comparison with the armour-plated ships. Having
dealt with the skin, I now come to the pith and marrow
and bone of the navy—namely, the seamen. We take this
year a vote for the same number of officers, seamen, ma-
rines, and toys as we took last year—namely, 76,000.
There is, in fact, a small increase, because the civilians—a
class of men in the Customhouse left as a legacy by the
Customhouse to the Admiralty, are fast disappearing, and as
they disappear their places are supplied by seamen in the
coastguard. Their number was last year 1,150. This
year it is only 1,000; so that there is really this small in-
crease of 150 men. The men are distributed as follows :
I should, perhaps, weary the house if I told them what are
the ships at every station. I will therefore content myself
with giving the numbers in the Channel fleet and on the
Mediterranean, North American, and Indian stations. In
the Channel we have one ship-of-the-line, the Revenge,
four of these iron-plated frigates, and one other vessel—that
is, six ships. They carry 187 guns and are manned by
3,146 men. In the Mediterranean we have 6 ships of the line,
5 frigates and corvettes, and 15 other vessels. These 26 ships
earry 706 guns:and are manned by 8,524 men. On the North
American and West Indian station we have 1 ship of the
line, 8 frigates and corvettes, and 22 other vessels. These
31 ships carry 543 guns and are manned by 6,573 men. On
the East India and China stations, where we have charged
ourselves with the extra duties of the Indian navy, which
existed up to last year, we have 4 frigates and corvettes and
29 other vessels, These 33 ships carry 234 guns and are
manned by 3,528 men. On distant stations we have 14 fri-
gates and corvettes and 40 other vessels. These 54 ships
carry 587 guns and are manned by 8,566 men. The result
of the whole is that we have 150 ships in commission, car-
rying 2,257 guns and manned by 30,337 men. That is our
force afloat. In addition we have various services, ships
ordered home and on surveying service, taking 14,638 men.
We have reserves of seamen, and I know my right hon.
friend attazhes great interest to the number of reserves in
home ports. Within the last few weeks we have told off a
line-of-battle ship's crew for the Royal Oak, and they are
ready to go on board as soon as they are wanted. The pre-
sent number of reserves is 3,000. (Hear, hear.) The su-
pernumerary warrant officers, kroomen, &c., number 4,000,
We have boys under training, independent of those in the
fleet, to the number of 2,050. We have 11,000 marines on
shore. The coastguard afloat, including tenders and block-
ships, number 4,652, and the coastguard ashore 4,000. The
grand total is 73,687 men on Feb. 23, irrespective of civi-
lians, showing that we are some few hundred short, princi-
pally marines and boys, and of course we are taking steps
to complete their full number. (Hear, hear.) I may give
the committee the assurance that nothing can be more sa-
tisfactory or more contented than the condition of the
seamen of the fleet. We have not yet got rid of the
bounty men, but so important does the Admiralty think
it that, in order to clear them off as soon as possible, they
have brought home several ships and paid them off, with the
view of getting rid of those men. (Hear, hear) Every
gentleman must be sorry that it should be necessary to re-
sort to flogging. Discipline requires that we should have
the power, but it is our earnest desire to keep down the
punishments as much as possible, and I hope next year to
be able to make a much more satisfactory statement than
even the present. (Hear, hear.) The popularity of the
servicemay be seen from this fact :—At the commencement
of the continuous-service system there was considerable
difficulty in inducing
the men to enter for continuous ser-
vice. Our present position is that more than three-fourths
are continuous -service men, which gives us great facility in
manning the navy ; because the men who have come home
and gone on leave join fresh ships. The committee will re-
member that it was determined to put the men in two
classes, and that men in the first class should not be liable
to flogging. Of the whole number 87 per cent, of the men
in the fleet belong to the first class by their own good con-
duct, leaving only 13 per cent. in the second class. (Hear,
hear.) The Admiralty have used great endeavours to orga-
nise barracks for seamen. We are going to commence bar-
racks at Portsmouth. We have not progressed so rapidly
as might be wished, became we found that the site was not
central enough. We have transferred that site to the War-
office, who have given us a site near the north end of the
dockyard, with which, in consequence of the fortifications,
they are able to dispense. We propose to begin at De-
vonport, and also to lay the foundations of barracks at
Portsmouth. (Hear, hear.) Before I quit the subject of
punishment let me advert to the boys. The system is
developing itself with great success, and we principally
owe the good conduct of the men to the ships having
been
manned by those who wore our own boys. A

great debt of gratitude is due to Sir F. Grey for the I
care and attention which he has bes'owed on this subject,
and he assures me that, to the best of his belief, in
the course of a short time our navy may be filled up en-
tirely by our own boys, with the exception of 600 or 700
men, who will be required to enter from other sources.
(Hear, hear.) The reason we have been able to put down
punishment is because you have generously given us the
means by which those changes have been made. *you have
expended vast sums in the education of these toys,
and you are now beginning to reap the reward of
your great expenditure for the benefit of the navy.
(Cheers.) We are trying various methods of ventila-
tion, and we believe that when the ships are properly ven-
tilated there will be a great decrease in the sick lists.
(Hear.) Lastly comes the question of cooking. There was a
great desire to be able to cook soft bread. We found that
it was rather objected to, and the men preferred biscuit.
But we attribute it not to any dislike of soft bread, but be-
cause they can get their savings of biscuit, which they can-
not of bread. We are trying a new cooking apparatus, by
which we hope to be able to give not only soft bread, but
roast meat, as a change for the meat which is now habi-
tually salt. (Hear, hear.) I now turn to the subject of the
Naval Reserve. That great body of merchant seamen,
which has now become a national institution, has largely
increased in number during the last year. (Hear, hear.)
Last year the number of men enrolled was 10,000. We have
now nearly 17,000, of whom 15,000 are drilled and perfectly
ready to serve their country. (Hear, hear.) Of these 7,000
are at home and can bo called out at any moment. It is
impossible for me to speak too highly of this valuable force.
(Hear.) We have also established a body of officers in
connection with the Naval Reserve, Of the 400 officers
which Parliament empowered us to engage we have already
191, which in a single year is a considerable number to ob-
tain. (Hear, hear.) Then we have the Naval Coast
Volunteers, a very fair body of men, whom we think may
still improve. At present we have no power to take these
men bee and 100 leagues from their own shores. It ap-
pears to us very desirable that, in the event of our re-
quiring the services of this force, we should not be confined
to employing them within so limited a distance. (Hear.)
We believe that by a little more care in the selection of re-
cruits we may be able to induce seafaring men to join the
force on the understanding that a more extended use is to
be made of their services should necessity require them.
Accordingly it will be my duty to introduce a bill for the
purpose of reorganising that force. (Hear.) A body of pen-
sioners and riggers completes the sum of our naval forces.
I have now shown to the committee that while the Govern
went have endeavoured to enforce a strict economy, they
have done so without making any reduction in the num-
ber of our forces. (Hear.) 1 understand that there are some
who think we are going too far. I sincerely hope that
whatever the committee may do, they will at least not com-
pel the Government to curtail the number of this magnifi-
cent body of men. There are several minor items with
which I need not now trouble the committee, but about
which hon. members may perhaps desire information when
we come to the particular votes. For instance, there is a
small increase, which I have no doubt will be cheerfully
conceded, in the pay of colonels of marines. We also pro-
pose to reorganise the establishment of clerks in the dock-
yards. At present each dockyard has its own special staff,
but we desire to mass them together, so that we may be
able to command the services of each clerk at any station
we choose. In that way we hope to secure both greater
economy and efficiency. We are also desirous of making a
small increase in the establishment of the Comptroller of
the Navy, the business of which has quite outgrown the
staff. I hope I have satisfied the committee by what I have
said that in reducing the expenditure the Government have
not in any way sacrificed the interests of the navy. In
consequence of the great sums which Parliament has granted
to the Admiralty we have been enabled to make an im-
portant addition to the fleet, to furnish our dockyards with
ample stores, and to reorganise our magnificent forces. Mr.
Massey, I beg to move a vote of £2,921,951 for the wages
of 76,000 seamen and marines.
Sir J. PAKINGTON—I am happy to say that I have
heard nothing in the very interesting statement of my
noble friend to render it necessary for me to trouble the
committee with more than a few observations. lam still
more happy to say that I find nothing in the estimates, any
more than in the speech of my noble friend, which requires
me to make serious objections to any portion of the pro-
posals of the Government. (Hear, hear.) A very strong
and natural desire has prevailed both on the part of Parlia-
ment and the country that the enormous amount which the
Navy Estimates had reached during the last few years
should be reduced as far as was compatible with the inte-
rests of the service. It is therefore very satisfactory to learn
that the Government have made the estimates for this year
less by a million than those of the year before. I think my
noble friend is justified in claiming for the Government
credit for effecting that reduction without encroaching on
the efficiency of the navy. (Hear, hear.) Those points to
which the advocates of a strong navy attach most import-
ance are the maintenance of an adequate number of men
and progress in the building of that new class of vessels
the value of'which is every year becoming more apparent.
(Hear.) lam afraid thas those opinions are not shared by
all the gentlemen on both sides of the committee—but I feel
bound to express my own satisfaction that the Government
has not proposed any reduction in the number of men.
That has been a wise and prudent resolve. Irrespective of
the extent of the force we are asked to vote, every one
must have heard with unqualified gratification the state-
ments of my noble friend as to the improved character of
the men. (Hear, hear.) I listened with some anxiety to
what my noble friend had to say on the subject of flogging.
There can be no doubt that there is a general desire that
the discipline of the navy should be maintained without
resort to that mode of punishment. I trust that the dis-
use of corporal punishment may be brought about by the
improved character of the seamen, and that the
Admiralty will take care not to make any changes calcu-
lated to impair the discipline of the service. (Hear, hear.)
I was also glad to hear of the great increase of continuous-
service men. My noble friend has adverted to the
anxiety I felt bound to express in former years
that an end might be put to those discreditable
scenes, of which we have recently seen too many, when
ships lay in the roadsteads for weeks and months waiting
for men. I am glad to know that what I have so long urged
is at length accomplished, and that we have now a reserve
of seamen, who may be draughted to any ship which re-
quires a crew. I am only sorry that we have not had a
more satisfactory statement as to the accommodation pro-
vided for the reserve. 1 fear that the greater part of them
are scattered about in hulks and elsewhere, and I regret
that tho Government did not see fit to take a larger vote for
barracks this year. (Lord C. Paget—We can only go on
with the foundations at first.) I trust, however, that the
Government do not intend to delay the progress of the
works. Looking to the importance of a permanent reserve,
I hope that no mere wish to cut down a vote has led the
Government to propose a smaller sum for this item, and that
no time really will be lost in the completion of those bar-
racks. (Hear.) Another important item is the progress of
our ships ; and here again I am happy to say that I regard
the statement of the noble lord as perfectly satisfactory. I
was glad to hear from him that there are no less than 21
armour covered vessels now in progress, and that by the
end of the year ten will be ready for commission. I feel
some doubts with regard to the success of all the different
classes of these ships; but looking to the fact that this new
class of men-of-war is yet in its infancy, considerable lati-
tude ought certainly to be left to the Government in trying
those experiments without which we cannot hope to ar-
rive at any successful result. (Hear, hear.) I doubt
very much whether the advantages possessed by that larger
class of ships—the Minotaur, the Northumberland, and
the Agincourt—which the present Admiralty are building,
covered entirely with armour from one end to the other, and
larger by 500 or 600 tons than the Warrior and the Black
Prince, may not be purchased too dearly, and whether they
will be really found to be good sea-going ships in heavy
weather. The cupola ships must be regarded as a matter of
experiment, and I am not disposed to blame the Admiralty
for trying them. So with regard, too, to the new class of
ships, of which no one I suppose has heard anything until
to-night, which have been recommended by the new Con-
structor of the Navy, Mr. Reed. I cannot mention Mr.
Reed's name without expressing my regret at the unusual
course which the Admiralty have taken in placing a gen-
tleman entirely unconnected with the Admiralty in such a
high position over the heads of an establishment which un-
doubtedly contains within itself some persons of great abi-
lity and skill. I should be sorry to say a word which would
do injustice to Mr. Reed, for it happens that he is secretary
to the Institute of Naval Architects, of which I have the
honour to be president. I have seen much of him during the
last few years, and know more of him personally than ofany
of the dockyard officials • All the intercourse I have had
with him has given me a high opinion of his character and
his general abilities. (Hear.) But with all the respect I feel
for him, I cannot but regret that the Admiralty have taken
the unusual course of placing him over the head of such a
man as Mr, Oliver Lang, for instance, a gentleman whose
scientific requirements have been proved by the construction
of some of the finest ships in the navy. I entirely approve
what the Admiralty are doing at Chatham. Whether I ap-
prove what my hon. friend has been saying at Chatham is
a different matter—(a laugh)—perhaps he may have said a
good deal more there than was discreet, but putting aside
his dinners and his speeches, I quite concur in what he is
doing there. I myself, when in office, always expressed my
intention of spending a considerable sum of money in mak-
ing Chatham our chief naval arsenal, and I am sorry to see
that only £20,000 is proposed this year for that purpose.
With regard to the question of barracks, I understand my
noble friend to say that the Government were not indisposed
to press them forward, and that the Note was only limited
by the power of expenditure within the year. (Hear.) To
that part of my noble friend's speech which referred to the
improved ventilation of our men-of-war I listened with
some regret. I understood him last year to say that a com-
mission had been appointed to consider this subject, and
from the tone of his speech to-night I am led to infer that that
commission has not reported, or that it has not been able
to make any suggestions on which the Admiralty would
venture to act. 1 have received a communication lately
that four of our ships on the West India station—the Fire-
brand, the Spiteful, the Jason, and the Racer—wen at-
tacked by the yellow fever in 1861, and I am told that in
these ships there were 334 oases of yellow fever, of which
a considerable number ended fatally. I hope the attention

of the Admiralty will be directed to the subject. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. BAXTER was grieved at the remark which had
fallen from the hon. member for Norfolk on the subject of
French invasion—(hear)—and was surprised to hear the
hon. member for Chatham say that we ought to have a
navy not only prepared to grapple with that of France,
but to resist the navies of France, Russia, Austria, and
Turkey combined. He would not, however, move an
amendment, because he thought that the navy was a
popular as well as a necessary service, and also because he
saw in the estimates, as they had been presented to the
House, an earnest proof of the desire of the Government
to make a salutary and substantial saving. At the same
time, he could not help remarking upon the fact that vra
now possessed no less than fifty-six wooden screw line-of-
battle ships, which the noble lord the Secretary for the
Admiralty had already stigmatised as floating slaughter-
houses for our seamen. He hoped that that would be re-
medied in future, by building lighter and swifter vessels
of the Alabama class, which vessel, without carrying a
large armament or a numerous crew, had performed ex-
ploits altogether unprecedented in the annals of war.
Above all things, he hoped the naval reserve system would
be fostered and preserved.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE cordially supported the vote
for 57,000 men; but, cousideriog that the Government
had now all the Indian navy on their backs, he was afraid
they would find they had taken upon themselves an
amount of work they might some day regret. With
regard to iron ships, he was afraid the Government had
undertaken the adoption of too many classes of those ves-
sels before they properly understood the true principles of
their rigging and construction. The hon. baronet then
protested against the appointment of Mr. Reed, who had
been secretary to a debating society, as chief constructor
of the navy, over the heads of such well known and talented
men as Mr. Laing, Mr. Abethell. and Mr. Moody—two of
whom, notwithstanding the statement of the noble lord
(Lord C. Paget) as to their being "old," were now in the
prime of life, and the third was very little older than his
lordship himself. (Hear.) The hon. baronet also recom-
mended that greater attention should be paid to the ventila-
tion of men-of-war, and mentioned a case where he had
found the thermometer 50 on deck and 78 in the men's
berths below. He was sorry to fins that that vessel had
lately been ordered to a West Indian station. He was de-
lighted that corporal punishment was decreasing, and he
hoped the time would come when it would altogether cease.
(Hear, hear.)
Admiral WALCOTT could not express his unqualified
satisfaction at the reductions which had been stated ey the
noble lord ; for it should never be forgotten that it Was upon
her navy that this country had mainly to depend.
Mr. COBDEN said there were not two opinions in this
country as to the patriotic maxims which the gallant admi-
ral had put forth with such emphasis. There was no one in
the house who was not of opinion that England must main-
tain a navy superior to any other in the world. (Hear,
hear.) But no country in the world denied our legitimate
right to have such a navy, nor was there any necessity to
make this a ground of antagonism. It was simply from
our insular position and our commerce, which was larger
than that of any other country in the world, that we were
entitled to have a larger fleet than other nations. No one
disputed our legitimate right to such a fleet, but the effi-
ciency and strength of a navy did not necessarily depend,
as in other days, on the number of men Noted for it. If they
put one hundred thousand sailors, the best in the world, on
board the ships that now belonged to her Majesty's navy,
there was not one nautical authority present or elsewhere
who would not admit that a score of iron-clad vessels, which
were probably now in existence on the other side of the At-
lantic, with 1-20th of those men on board, could destroy the
whole of the 100,000 sailors. (Hear, hear.) It was no longer
a question of mere brute force and numbers; it was a ques-
tion of science and skill—in fact of intelligence. They were
asked to vote 76,000 men, and he did not see why he should
be accused of any want of patriotism if he objected to that
number. He objected to 76,000 for this reason. He denied
that they could employ them in any ships they had in
which they could 1-e of any use to the country. That was
the maximum number employed in the Crimean war. It
was a war establishment. The Americans were this year
carrying on a war with a coast of 3,500 miles to blockade,
and their navy estimates amounted only to £13,000,000,
while we in a time of peace were going to vete £11,000,000.
What was to be done with these seamen? A large number
must be applicable to those large wooden line-of-battle ships
which unhappily were built by the precipitation of the right
hon. gentleman opposite, and by the gross inconsistency of
the present Secretary of the Admiralty. He said inconsist-
ency, because seven years ago the noble lord told the house
that the day of the old line-of-battle ships had gone by. He
said the fate of empires would not in future depend on line-
of-battle ships, which were not suited to the modern mode
of warfare. Every other nautical authority had preached
the same doctrine. Admiral Napier, not long before
his death, declared in that house that a line-of-battle ship,
struck by a modern percussion shell, would have a hole driven
in her side large enough to drive a wheel-barrow through.
Another gallant officer in that house said that a line-of-
battle ship, attacked by these modern percussion shells,
would be nothing but a slaughter-house. He asked any prac-
tical man whether, if we had a war with America to-morrow,
he would send one of our line-of-battle ships, with 700 sr
800 men, and 30 or 40 tons of gunpowder on board, to meet
the iron-clad Monitor on the other side of the Atlantic.
He had heard the hon. member for Finsbury say that a Go-
vernment who sent a wooden line-of-battle ship into action
against these modern shell guns would deserve to be im-
peached. He (Mr. Cobden) was not speaking from his own
authority, but was docile in learning from those who knew
better than himself. He took the authority of one of the
ablest of nautical men—Capt. Halstead—who said as the
result of experiment that the ninth round from a modern
shell gun would set a wooden vessel in flames, which would
be quite inextinguishable. If that was known these line-of-
battle ships were useless for the purpose of warfare, as were
also our great wooden frigates, and the £20,000 or £30,000
they were now voting for such vessels was really thrown
away. He challenged any naval officer to contradict him
when he said that our 64 line-of-battle ships, including the
coastguard vessels, would be utterly useless in case of war ;
and our large frigates might be considered to share tka same
fate. That being the case, was it not delusive to suppose that
in maintaining these vessels we were increasing our strength.
The Government were straining the expenditure up to a
point at which people were clamorous for a reduction, and
would it not be better to have 20,000 fewer sailors and put
the finances of the country in better order, than to have a
large number of wooden vessels, which all admitted would
be of no use in case of war. He objected to the number of
seen, and also to the whole expenditure of the navy, because
as the hon. member for Montrose had said, and as he heard
the late Sir J. Graham once state in the house when they had
voted the number of men they had voted the expenditure of
the navy in all its departments. He was surprised that the
hon. member for Montrose had made so much concession on
the subject of the reduction of £1,000,000 for stores. That
reduction really meant that they must buy more stores
next year. The hon. member for Montrose said the Secre-
tary to the Admiralty was too apologetic in his tone, but
he was himself too apologetic for the Government in his
remarks upon the estimates. This was, in fact, no per-
manent reduction. Moreover, he did not think they could
keep 76,000 men afloat for £10,500,000, because they were
constantly increasing the price of their vessels. An old
line-of-battle ship cost £200,000, but on the new principle,
with iron armour, would cost £350,000 ; and if they laid out
a vast amount of capital in these expensive ships they
wanted fewer men, because they did not require quite the
same number of ships. If one of these iron-clad gunboats
would go into a fleet of wooden vessels, like a lion among a
flock of sheep, it implied that it possessed a vastly increased
force in consequence of the construction, and if they built a
line-of-battle ship in the same way they would vastly in-
crease its force and power, and they would not want so
many of them nor so many sailors. The ship Agincourt
was 6,000 odd tons and threw a broadside of 1,3221b5. ; but
that was three times the tonnage and broadside of the Vic-
tory, on which Nelson won the battle of Trafalgar. The
Victory had 1,100 or 1,200 men, but the Agincourt, with
three times its strength and 100 times its strength if they
put iron against wood, had only 704 men, which showed
that as they increased the amount of capital expended in
these vessels they required fewer men to work them. It was
a fallacy, therefore, to suppose they must keep up the num-
ber of 76,000 men. To send them afloat in ships in which
they would be serviceable, they must spend not £10,000,000
but £20,000,000 more on the navy. It was only within the
last few years that men of genius, mechanicians, and others,
had directed their attention to these new armaments ; but
although we were only beginning the work of invention
with regard to implements of warfare, how rapidly we had
gone on. He sat on a committee in 1848, in which Sir
Thomas Hastings said he had no doubt whatever that it a
screw were put into a line-of-battle ship, it would make it
much less effective as a man-of-war, and that opinion was
backed by other officers. What had happened since ?
Their sailing vessels had wholly disappeared; and he must
say it was something like insanity on the part of the Go-
vernment to rush into building more wooden line-of-battle
ships after they knew the success of iron-clad vessels.
(Hear, hear.) In 1863 they had 64 of these wooden line-of-
battle ships, and he defied the Government to produce any
nautical authority who would send one of them to oppose an
iron-clad vessel. This should make them a little cautious
of what they were now doing. (Hear.) Rich as we were,
could we afford, with all these rapid transitions, and having
this stock of line-of-battle ships, including coast guard
vessels, to carry out even these novelties on a grand scale ?
We had now 20 iron-clad broadside port vessels, but were
we sure that in 10 years hence they might not be super
seded by others? Capt. Cowper :Coles led them to expect
that he would supersede them entirely by his turret ships.
They must also bear in mind that in America they were
now hardly building any but turret vessels, and built one
every fortnight. In a little tract Capt. Coles showed the
superiority of his over the broadside iron-clad vessels, and
if his view were correct we were running the greatest risk
in building any more of them. Capt. Coles put in parallel
columns the Agincourt and an armour plated ship throw-
ing:an equal weight of broadside built on his principle. He
mentions the Agincourt as carrying 704 men, her draught
as 26 feet 2 inches, her cost as £385,342, weight of broad-
side as 1,3221b5., and tonnage as 6,021 tons. His turret
ship he put down at draught 22 feet instead of 26 feet, as
carrying 200 men instead of 704,- as throwing the same