The Sun.
London, England, 1863-10-26 00:00:00

sent moment. Every tradesmen and manufac-
turer was as busy as he possibly could be, and
he was trying to meet all the demands made upon
his taxed energies and skill to provide goods.
Labour never was more abundant. Everybody had
employment for both head and hand, and the mone-
tary affairs were easy and healthy, notwithstanding
the assertion of the Times editor to the contrary.
All this was very pleasing. But it was said the
crash was certain to come sooner or later. That was
true, if all the prosperity he had described was the
result of an inflated paper currency. The question
then was, "Is there more paper in circulation in the
North than there is actual and available property in
the North ?" and to that he could reply, " There is
no more paper in circulation in the Norttl,thA new
is
i
safe, when we have the means to convert .
country must have credit, an old country dil not
need it. Such being the fact, in about once. every
10 years a commercial crash—a kind of ran/cella-
neous crash—came, and when the bubble was over
the property remained. The community was Not
hurt by it. The property was there, the only differ-
ence being a change of owners. He believed Ame-
rica had never been more financially sound than she
was now. Tradespeople were doing almost an enh.
tirely cash business. The Government had issued
bonds upon the whole American Union, and not
State bonds as before, and the consequence Was that
probably some 400,000,000 or 800,000,000 of capital
of the North had been invested in the security
offered by the Government, which, under another
name, was in America what the consols were in
England. The Americana felt that their Govern-
ment must stand, and hence they made it their
trustee and their savings bank, in which they in-
vested their 100,000,10,000, or 5,000 dole. Nothing
to the Americans seemed more sound and healthy
than the credit of the United States, and hundreds
of millions of dollars had been invested in the United
States bonds in that way. Referring to his own
church, he said the blacks were allowed to sit any-
where—wherever they got, but it was not so in all
other churches. The treatment of the blacks in the
North had been bad. The North had been poisoned
by slavery when the party now triumphant was in
a minority. All the present majority in the North
asked for was that, since they had set their faces for
going to Jerusalem, nobody would stop them. The
late riots in New York were the sore raised up by a
foreign blister. They arose through the misinformed
Irish believing that if the slaves were set free there
would no longer be any work for them. After some
further obszrvations, which were mainly repetitions
of what Mr. Beecher had said in previous speeches,
many questions were put to him regarding the con-
stitution of America, the anti-slavery party there,
the laws, &c., all of which he promptly answered.
The proceedings did not terminate till between
one and two o'clock p.m., although the company sat
down shortly after nine o'clock a.m.

Mr. J. Laird, M,P.. upon National Defences.

On Fridal last the prizes for rifle and artillery shooting
competed for on the 17th ult. by the volunteers of Birken-
bead and district were distributed by Mr John Laird, M.P.,
who presided.
The CHAIRMAN, after some remarks upon the constitu-
tion of the volunteer force, addressed the meeting as follows
—Having said this much, I may perhaps be now allowed to
go into the question of the defences of the country. The
army and navy, everybody admits, so far as the personnel
goes, is kept in the highest possible state of efficiency. In
proof of that I need only call your attention to the charac-
ter, conduct, and known abilities of the officers of the Chan-
nel fleet, which lately visited this river. (Cheers.) I have
had opportunities for., years—nay, all ray life, in fact—to
meet naval men; but I must say I never met a set of men
.better adapted to fill the position they were placed in than
those who were here with the Channel fleet; and I feel con-
vinced that, if provided with proper means, they will fulfil
their duty to the country. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, in last ses-
sion of Parliament, and in the session before that, great at-
- tention was paid not only to the army and navy, but also to
the way in which that army and navy should be armed—the
sort of rifles and the sort of guns that they should use. A
great deal of discussion took place ebont the Armstrong gun;
and so much was said about the millions it had cost, and
about the wasteful expenditure upon it, that I really thought
the gentlemen who made thoseremarksinthe House of Com-
mons were giving expression to mere figures of speech
rather than- to anything else. But the statements were made
again and again. They were repeated day after day and
week after week, until a committee was appointed to inquire
into the merits of the Armstrong gun, its coat and its effici-
ency. I was appointed to act on that committee, and rather
hard work it was, sitting for two or three hours a die, for
two or three days a week through two Sessions of Parlia-
ment. And I am bound to say, having sat on that committee
during the Sessions of 1862 and 1863, I was satisfied thet
pratically £2,500,000
.had been spent on that gun, and that
we had not got value for our money. (Hear.) And why did
we not get value ? Because I believe the appointment of Sir
William Armstrong an injudicious appointment. Ile was
appointed Engineer-in-Chief of Rifled Ordnance, and, of
course,thought his own guns were the beat that could be con-
structed; and, therefore, as an honourable man,he was bound
to endeavour to carry out his own principle; but he did it
with a bad result to the country, because, by being placed in
that position, I believe men like Whitworth, and Blakeley,
and others, who have invented guns and have done mush for
the scientific development of the gunnery question, were
kept back. I don't wean to impute anything to Sir William
Armstrong, but I say his was an untortunate appointment
on the part of the Government—(hear, hear)—and my opi-
nion is that such a post should be opened up to the country
generally; and that in scientific matters cf this kind you
should endeavour to bring to bear all the best and most per-
fect knowledge in the empire. If you do that, it strikes me
as a self-evident proposition that you are more likely to get
the best invention than you would de if you confined your-
self to the invention of merely one roan. (Applause.) Sir
William Armstrong started the ElswiekOrdnance Company.
When he was appointed the Engineer-in-Chief of Ordnance
he retired, but his partners carried on the business, and
they had a large amount of work, amounting to one million
of money, in three or four years to do for Government,
the Government spending the other million and a half.
Many statements were made in the committee, and very
much evidence was taken. Mr. Whiffin, the Accountant-
General, was called, and proved that, had the work done by
the Elswick Ordnance Company been done in the gun fac-
tory at Woolwich, the country would have saved, on an
expenditure of £600,000, no less a sum than £240,000; so
that we may calculate what a saving would have been
made if you reflect for a moment that the amount spent was
£1,003,000, and the work might have been done at Wool-
wich. I will candidly admit that there was a difference of
opinion upon that point, but my argument in the committee
was that Mr. Whiffin was called as the Accountant-Gene-
ral to verify the accounts presented to the committee. And
who is Mr. Whiffin? it may be asked. Well, he is a man
appointed by the Government to go to India, and put the
accounts of the army and the department in India in a pro-
per and sound basis. If he was an unfit and improper man
to be put in that position, we must take it for granted that
his evidence before the Select Committee on Ordnance was
incorrect; and, if he gave evidence that was incorrect, then
the Government should not have sent him on that mission to
India. I believe there has been a large expenditure on these
Armstrong guns which might have been avoided. But I will
not give you merely my own opinion, I will give you that of
hra Grace the Duke of Somerset, who was himself examined
epos this committee, as to the efficiency of the Armstrong
gun' after all this enormous expenditure had been incurred.
The Duka
if eiveh_. Somerset, in reply to question 5,012, said—
have had greatereeprozeur of
the facts.
eaneea:,4,,teeleert that the Armstrong gun had the greatest
whel
w:etatiragertheatest power of penetration of any gun tried ;
Armstrong
it ourselves that was not confirmed by
The matting gun. at a great distance, may
old 68-pounder is penetration, but for naval purposes
a
thee
at 200 yards it
1Y had not the greatest power. Our
pounder Armstrong gitir:l
100-
they had been at work fOr a Powerful gun than the
This was evidence given after
years, and spent 2e millions
oidnoble duke goes on to say that
of money. Then, ageie
a 68 pounder gun of the style Struck a harder blow at
r 6 Armstrong gun. His
short range than the 100-
Grace said, reply to question
100.7 allloo-poundere;
a 70..1°8--" I thought it so
throw a 1001 b. shot that I considerPerrer
omen an advantage to have
b l
w probablegun
c ta :ae
thatet couldaaware
the
o
were made by
aatateler and a 68-
anew:mut of the Warrior would have bte.h-
end it was not until we tried a
pounder against
dCapts.trCuoclkes'as cupola
that the 6e-poun er harder are
than the 100-
pounder at short range. Other Otherstawteitrahente
the noble duke and parties,. which I
trouble you— Y into this
it excites •
you--but I thought it right to go briefly into
not
question, because at this moment considerable na-
tereet. America has guns of very great power and of re
naval officer with whom I havevery
great size; and every
fought
at close quarter ; that the ship that can deliver the harder
the most efileient ship; and the
versed has told me that in naval wars battles will bought
blows at 200 yards will be
Duke of Somerset, as you have already heard, has stated
68
that at short ranges the oldn.
I do not say that
is more efficient
than the 100-pounder Armstrongo
the 68 -pounder is the most of
rly been drawn
to this
but public attention has vory vroi e sun teat we can get;
d Sin and power we
in. regard to naval guns of increase
subject, rind the next thing that we must do is to see how,
can work them on board ship. Perhaps it may be said
that I ehould.apologise for going into these ma but Itters,
for one believe that the Volunteer movement ie an essential
part of the defences of the country; and that unless the
Army, the Navy, and Volunteers are properly armed
and equipped we cannot expect adequately to defeni the
country; and,
a$ wo ought to do, carry the wet- into the

enemy's camp, which is the proper way of banishing
intruders, (Hear, hear.) If we are to go into
this question of large guns which has been talked of so
much, and which has been looked after, not only with great
interest in this country, but with more than usual interest
in America,—if we are to adopt those guns, we can
only do so by resorting to the cupola plan of Captain Coles
to work them. I believe that by that plan we ean work the
largest and the heaviest guns. I know we can work guns of
from 15 to 20 tons with the greatest possible ease. We
cannot do that on beard a broadside ship, and if our battles
are to be fought and won by ships with the heaviest arms,
meat, the sooner we consider the question of the ships best
Calculated to carry those heavy guns the better it will be
for the country. What have we done on this subject I
The cupola, I should tell you, if you do not already know
it, stands in the middle of the ship, and you can strengthen
a vessel to carry a eepela of any
weight. You can armour-
plate a cupola to any thickness-12 or 15 inches, and you
can make it perfectly impenetrable to shot; and, as it is a
very small portion of a very large ship, you won't depress
the ship much in the water, but the battery will be well
protected and imprevious to shot. That, you will see, is a
very' great point. But what has our Government done
with regard to this plan ? There are two plans now before
the public. One is that of Captain Coles ; the other is the
plan by Mr. Reed. Now, it is quite clear to naval men
that, if either of these plans is to supersede the old broad-
side system of gunnery, the sooner either one or the other,
or both, are tried the better. But again I ask, what has
our Government done ? In April or May, 18d2, they
stated in the House of Commons, after various remon-
strances, that the Royal Sovereign had been ordered to be
cut down to be fitted with Coles's cupola, and that another
was to be converted on Mr. Reed's plan. 1 venture to say
that if proper exertions had been used those two ships
might have been ready in six months from April last (hear,
hear), and I don't believe they will either of them be ready
for six months to come. In the meantime, a large
amount of money has been expended in other ways ; and if
these plans of Reed and Coles should prove to be the best,
we shall have wasted some millions of money on ships of
another construction. If we were to go to war to-morrow
our navy is not—l say it advisedly—in such a state as that
we could go to war with a certainty of success. How do we
stand with regard to iron plated ships? It we were to go to
war with America, they have a number of iron clad turret
ships perfectly fitted in every respect for coast defence,while
we have no ships at all that are suited for the purpose. It
will not do to say, as we did during the Russian war, that
we can build 150 or 250 gunboats by means of private yards
in 12 months. Armour plated ships require a length of time
in their construction, and I say most emphatically that it
would be the best policy of this country if the Legislature
would turn its attention to this question, because, although
the fleet we saw in the Mersey the other day was composed
of most magnificent ships—most of them drawing from 25
to 28 feet of water—l need scarcely tell you who know any-
thing of the port of Liverpool that they are perfectly unfit
for war on the coasts of France or America. (Hear, hear.)
If we went to war to-morrow, we should go into that war
for the first year or two under most disadvantageous cir-
cumstances, and then we should have to turn cur dockyards
and our private yards to some account—in fact, to do some-
thing to get us out of the scrape in which we should find
ourselves, as we had to do during the Russian war, because,
if in that war we had had a sufficient number of Efficient
gunboats, which we had not until the second year of that
war, we would have put an end to that conflict much more
rapidly than we did, and at far less cost to this country. I
think it right to impress this point particularly upon the
meeting. We have only two ships that I can find on looking
over the Navy List that could possibly be considered suit-
able for cost defences, and those are two vessels constructed
on Mr. Reed's plan. Why they are not brought forward I
cannot pretend to say; but I do believe this, that the money
wasted in the naval administration of this country is some-
thing. fearful. We havespent from £30,000,000 to £33,000,000
in the last three years, and got a number of large ships
afloat, some of which you saw in the river the other day,
and others are building, but not ready, and none of which
will be of any use to us to carry on a war in the circum
stances in which we shall most probably be placed. I state
these facts distinctly, (Hear, hear.) I have stated them
in my place in the House of Commons (hear, hear), and I
have no fear of their being heard by anybody in any place,
because I can prove them cq be correct. I assert, then, tlet4
there are only two ships capable of application to coast and
harbour defences; and that the two ships on Captain Coles's
plan draw so much water that they era utterly .useless for
the purposes thgy are intended for--namely, the defences of
our coasts and harbours ; and, moreover,that they. arta neither
masted nor rigged, nqr are they fit to be sent across the At-
lantic. It is in vain that Captain. Coles has protested to our
Government against thug state of things. The has urged
them to make thoes ships eeryiceable, not
,only for the de-
fences of our own coasts, but for foreign service. I need
not tell any of the many commercial men I see here to-night
the difficulties that attend ships of great draught of water
getting into and out of Liverpool. How, then, can ships of
that class cruise about our banks ? (Hear, hear.) Whet we
want is a number of ships of a certain description, of from
8 to 10 or 15 feet draught of water ; and, unless the Go-
vernment come to do something of thatsort before very long,
we shall have to spend a large sum of money without being
in a position when the tine really comes to meet the emer-
gency; and we shall in the end spend considerably mote
money than would be the case if we considered the question
well at the present time. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Cobden has
been pleased within the last day or two to make some com-
plimentary remarks about my late firm at Birkenhead. I
don't agree with Mr. Cobden in his conclusions. I don't
think it would do to abandon entirely our Government
dockyards; but I lo believe it would be desirous to main-
tain them to a certain extent, while at the same time
they should have throughout the country a portion of their
work done in private establishments, so that in case of
war we would not only have the resources of the national
dockyards to rely upon, but the extensive resources of the
private yards, the proprietors of which would understand
how to do Government work. (Hear, hear.) But we stop
progress in this country, and the naval development of this
country has come to this, that it is supposed that when a
gentleman is appointed controller of the navy, whatever
his antecedents may have been—however respectable he
may be, however good a sailor he is—yet he must needs
carry all the shipbuilding brains of the country in his head.
What I want is simply this—that the Government shall
bring to bear for the interest of the country all the talent
that exists in the country. That is done already by the
Government in respect of engineering for the navy, and I
need not tell you who have turned your attention to the
subject that the engineering talent of this country, as ex-
emplified by Penn, by Maudalay, and others of considerable
eminence, has been the means of bringing a vast amount of
talent and ingenuity to bear in the construction of the most
perfect machinery which science could devise for propelling
our ships of war; and this would not and could not have
been the case if one man only had been placed at the head
of the naval engineering department, and everything left to
him. Competition is desirable in all things, but in this case
it is desirable extremely for the true interests of the country.
I do not want to be personal at all, because I will take the
testimony of a certain vessel's operations. I will take two
ships built in this neighbourhood—the Alabama and the
Florida. (Loud and protracted cheering.) lam not at all
ashamed, ladies and gentlemen, to own that my sons de •
signed and built the Alabama. (Renewed cheering.) Nor,
I am sure, is the builder of the Florida ashamed to say that
he designed and built that ship; but the testimony borne to
those vessels is not the testimony of Birkenhead or of Liver-
pool, or indeed of this country, but the testimony comes from
America. They are two vessels that have been afloat for
some considerable length of time, and they have defied the
power of 400 ships. (Cheering.) They have never been
caught. (Renewed cheering.) They were designed and
built by private individuals, but in this country it is the
misfortune of the managers of our marine to imagine that
one man and one man only is to carry in his head the brains
of all the designing talent of the country for building ships.
If they had got a little life in the Admiralty, then they
might have improved op the Alabama and the Florida,and
perhaps on other slip., (Laughter.) We have been ac-
customed to hear of the Ameticans boasting about their
shipbuilding, and that they built ships to run 20 miles an
hour. Ladies and gentlemen, the ^Alabama goes 13, but
the Americans have never been able to touch her. I
certainly do not agree with Mr. Cobden that we should rely
on private interests alone. I think the Government should
do in respect to shipbuilding as they have done with redard
to engineering. As I have told you, I was a member of the
committee for two sessions on the Armstrong gun, and that
committee recommended, and carried their recommendation,
that the inventions of all able men should ba properly con-
sidered. That was a great step in the right direction—(hear,
hear, and applause)—and, no doubt, our gunnery will be
very much advanced in the future in consequence. (Hear,
hear.) I may, perhaps, be tiring the audience—(cries of
No, no, and cheers)—but when I was asked to come here I
did not come here merely to talk about the volunteers. My
intention was to speak on the general defence of the coun-
try ; and, therefore, I now want to state, as shortly as I can,
my views on some points connected with that matter.
(Cheers.) You have had this point repeatedly stated in the
House of Commons, and it is one which is of lasting impor-
tance, and that is the question of dock accommodation for
n
ofp her
ships of the Royal navy. (Hear, hear.) Many gentlemen
here, no doubt, are connected with the trade of Liverpool ;
and I will just tell you now what the position of the Royal
dockyards are as compared with Liverpool, and then make
3. but only toura oe r ,
a few remarks on that point. Liverpool and Birkenhead have
400 acres of dock space, and 28 graving docks. The whole
Majesty's dockyards, including Chatham, Sheerness,
acres of
dock space,
Plymouth, and other places, have only 41
andfive tehfethneummabreer ocea
f pgbraleveinigtaig gooks
in
the
to go to Plymouth eaucte
ships like the NV •
Ports-
mouth harbour would
that fleet looked arn".
In the Mersey, the other day,
Admiral told me hintsenl7tt-
tim, they
g(anobthing at all ; hut we have seen that at
to the eolith ono part wee obliged
another to Portsmouth, and
take them all in. Why, the
( I
teaayxr
did of t but he got into the
idea of corning op hell that he was alarmed at the very
Mersey, and he got
and Now, every
tthherefore, being
could do, and as we did do, evearglien, as safely as we
,:sh.ay in thiciippyoesairngw, with
householder
very lams
imerchantn
Birkenhead
pays
taxpayers, they are all interested in Wifern:l
I explain to yon where some of it goes. se money goes.