The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-21 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC ,JOURNALS.

A petition presented last night by Mr. Huskisson
from the merchants of Liverpool engaged in the
trade with Mexico, praying for the protection of the
interests of the petitioners, and suggesting an in-
terference with the Spanish Government to prevent
it engaging in expeditions from Cuba against its
quondam Colonies, led to some interesting discu's-
sion. There seems to be little doubt that Spain is
unable to reduce Mexico, and the other possessions
in North and South America, which formerly be-
longed to her, to subjection to her. It becomes a
delicate question how long an obstinate Power shall
he allowed to persist in an impotent warfare, the
consequences of which are deeply injurious to it,
• neighbours. Spain is tillable to reconquer Mexico,
but she can foment parties in that country and pre-
vent the return of order. Under such circumstances
it is a hardship on the subjects of Great Britain
fled their commercial relations with Mexico and
other part; of North and South America, should be
rendered insecure by a war without any object. But
the Government of this country has not confined
itself to neutrality. There is good evidence that
we have interfered to prevent the South American
Governments invading the only possessions in the
West Indies, from whence Spain can invade the
American Continent. We have thus departed from
the strict line of neutrality-seand given to Mexico
taxed Colombia valid grotttois for complaint against
its. Even if we hail not interfered in the contest
between Spain and her quondam Colonies, we might
have been warranted in endeavouring to put an end
to a warfare without object, detrimental to all who
trade with South America. But having chosen to
interfere, the Governments of America have a well-
founded claim on us to prevent them suffering from
the consequences of our interference. It is, no doubt,
peculiarly incumbent on a powerful country like this
to set an example to the world of a scrupulous re-
gard to the recognised principles of international
law ; and we are far from advecating the principle
that a mere regard to interest ought to govern our
conduct in such a question as the present. But then it
does not follow, that beertuse our interest and that of
Mexico and the South American States happens to
be the same, we ought on that account to sacrifice
these interests, by giving a foolish advantage to Spain.
We are fur, however, from wishing that the Govern-
ment of this country should act In the manner re-
commended by Sir Robert Wilson. "If (said the
Gallant Officer) that Government (the Spanish
Government) were resolved to put an end to a war
of destruction, if the interests of Great Britain de-
manded it, the British Government ought now to
say, as Lord Bolingbrok.: said• to the French Mi-
nister on a former oterasion, respecting the Govern-
ment of Spain. The French Minister said, that it
was for the interest of France that Spain and France
should be under the government of one family ; but
it is not, said Bolingbroke, the interest of Britain to
allow that to continue. In 1672, also, when the
Treaty of Madrid took place—when Venice was
carrying on war against the Netherlands and objected
to making peace—the King of France declared that
the interest of Europe required that peace should
be procured for the Netherlands; and he said the
States must make peace, or that be would make
war against those who refused. This was the sort
of- language and conduct that ought now to be
held by the Government of Great Britain to-
wards Spain, if it were disposed to act to-
wards it in the most friendly manner."—We con-
fess we do not think that because a nation is
powerful it ought to assume a dictatorship over all
other nations; and, moreover, we question the pru-
dence of exciting the jealousy of the world by such
an assumption. But it is not necessary to take such
a questionable course. In the case of the hostilities
between the Turks and Greeks, after allowing a
reasonable time to the belligerents to decide their
quarrel by force, the Powers of Europe at length
interposed, and declared that a regard to the inte-
rests of their own subjects called on them to pre-
vent the further continuance of hostilities. With-
out assuming any such dictatorship as Louis the Four-
teenth assumed, we may assuredly call on the other
great Powers to join in an endeavour to promote
peace between Spain arid her quondam Colonies;
and should we fail to obtain their concurrence, we
may act in such a way as a regard to the interests
of our own subjects may prescribe. Still we would
avoid whatever is calculated to give offence to other
Powers. It does not follow that because a nation
is powerful it ought to act always in such a manner
us to leave no option to other Powers but unqua-
lified obedience to our mandates, or war. Mr. Hus-
kisson, adverting to what had been said by Mr.
Peel and the %her speakers, observed, that taking
all circumstances into consideration, " he would say
again, that but for the interposition of England,
Cuba would have been conquered at that time by
an expedition from Colombia and Mexico. He could
not, indeed, avoid praising the forbearance they
had displayed on that occasion, in abandoning one
of the grandest conquests which any country could
have made, and one of the tidiest prizes which any
could desire to seize. The Government of this
country did not then incur any obligation to Mexico,
that it would not permit the Government of Cuba
to invade Mexico in their turn; but it became in
some degree its duty to take care that Mexico did
not suffer for its assent to their wishes." When a
Government chooses to depart from the line of pru-
dence, as our Government has done, one false step
leads only to another. Spain may say, " I did not
ask you to prevent the invasion of Cuba and Porto
Rico, and if you have been impertinent enough to
interfere in what did not concern you, is that a rea-
son why I should waive my right to re-conquer my
colonies if I can ?" The best ground for interfer-
ence is, the right of third parties to demand, after
a reasonable time, that hostilities, so detrimental to
them, should terminate, when they can no longer
be carried on with any hope of advantage to the
belligerents.—Morning Chronicle.

Last night in the discussion on the London and
Birmingham Canal—a very ugly business, of which
we have already given our readers some account—
Mr. Alderman Waithman observed that "the
Broker for the Bill was connected with Moses Levi,
who had been transported about twelve years ago.
He would not call this the most atrocious case of
the sort, for he had known a hundred as bad, and
had his motion been successful, he could have im-
plicated in similar transactions some scores of Mem-
bers of Parliament, who could not afterwards have
kept their seats." What a character of the Ho-
nourable House !—the purely Christian House, into
which no Jew:or Mahometan ought ever to enter !
What must be the effect of disseminating through
the country, that so large a proportion of the Mem-
bers of the honourable House are fit companions for
Moses Levi, a convicted felon ! Are we to wonder
that crimes against property should be on the in-
crease ?—Morning Chronicle.
We are not singular in attaching deep interest and
importance to a subject which was touched upon
two or three days ago in this Journal—viz., the pre-
sent condition of the navy and its prospects, if, un-
happily, it should soon be brought into conflict with
that of other maritime Powers. Many communica-
tions from professional men have reached us since
the appearance of those quotations from a recent
pamphlet by an old " Flag Officer," which were
appended to our own remarks upon the jnefEeient
methods in vogue for administering the navy of Great
Britain, and which we know haN produced in
high quarters a sensation th4t, however painful,
can hardly fail to be salutary. No shadow of
reason can be offered, no sort of excuse has even
been attempted, for multiplying with such. zealous
pertinacity, and at so-enormous an expense, a class
of frigates and of sloops, which were proved
in the last wee to be a miserable undermatch for the
vessels which they had been, called upon to en-
counter. To build 18-pounder frigates of 46 guns,
as antagonists to French 'and North Americans
carrying 60 guns, and 32-pounders on the main
deck, is on the face of it such a flinty-bearted con-
tempt for the public money, for the lives of British
sailors, and for the national honour, that we do

cordially hope, after the notice thus bestowed upon
it, the abuse will no longer be continued. There
is another and most serious branch of naval ad-
ministration which has been treated at great length
by the discerning author of the pamphlet, and seems
to deserve as well the laborious investigation which
it has cost him, as the unflinching severity of his
remonstrances and censures. This division of
the subject embraces the defective state of
the science of naval architecture, repressed as
:ire all voluntary efforts to promote it by extra-04i-
eial means, and retarded as its advances have beer
.hrough the monopoly in the construction of ships,
enjoyed by men in office and authority under the
Navy Board. The same section comprises also the
absence of opportunities for gaining instruction in
the management of squadrons by periodical assem-
blages of men-of-war for naval manmuvres, or in
gunnery through the medium of schools ashore,
and the very lax and negligent manner in
which the latter want has been supplied at sea by
practice and discipline at the great guns. After
alluding to the vessels which had been built on ex-
periment by Captains Hayes) Symonds, and Profes-
sor Inman,—the inconsiderate or perver'e restric-
tions platted upon them in the construction of their
ships, whereby their qualities were of necessity in-
jured,—and the insufficient means afforded for as-
certaining by fair comparison the relative properties
of those ships towards others built by the official
servants of the Government,—the author proceeds
as follows :—[We must add, before we insert the
subjoined passages, that more than one or two dis-
tinguished officers have of late anticipated a more

severe and discreditable chastisement to the British

navy, in any future conflict with those of France
and America, than it experienced from the latter
Power in the war of 1812, if there be not an imme-
diate, decisive, and effectual adoption of measures
for rendering the bulk of our seamen adepts in the
use of their guns at sea. The passages from Sir
Howard Douglas are worthy of deep attention.]
" From this important subject I pass to the measures
which have been adopted to preserve the discipline, effi-
ciency, and activity of our ships in commission, and to
counteract the inevitable efftcts of a long and profound
iteace on all warlike establishments. Between 1784 and
1793 we had three considerable naval armaments, and
there was consequently but little time for either officers or
men to forget what they had previously learned; but I
remember that it was during this period the constant
practice to assemble our guard-ships at Spithead as early
in the spring as possible, and to exercise them during the
summer months in those various evolutions which would
naturally suggest themselves to the mind of an experienced
officer. Has this good old system been followed up? I
fear that the reply will be, that (luring the last 14 years
(with one solitary exception in 1817) no squadron has
ever assembled for exercise,—that Spithead and Plymouth
Sound are generally to be sees without even senior officers'
ships to enforce regularity, as well as to stimulate by good
example to activity and emulation, and that our ships of
war, when fitted out for foreign service, proceed to their
respective stations without any previous inspection or re-
view, and almost always singly, incumbered with pas-
sengers, and overloaded with provisions and stores, re-
sembling too often a merchant•ship with a full cargo
making all haste to its pest of discharge, rather than a
British man-of-war in perfect trim and equipment, and
carefully preserving, during peace, that complete state of
order and preparation which can alone secure superiority
in war. It is quite unnecessary for me to enlarge on the
ill-effects which this deviation from our former system
must necessarily produce. An entire new set of officers
are gradually replacing those whose long experience in war
might, perhaps, have rendered further instruction less ue-
c•essary ; and if the rising generation are educated in a
system of negligence and inactivity, what will be the result
at the commencement of a new war, when our utmost
exertions will be required to secure our superiority over
rivals who have certainly lost no opportunity of improving
and perfecting their naval establishments, and whose
minds are fully alive to the errors to which they attribute
their former reverses ?

" A regiment, when ordered on foreign service, is al-
ways reviewed previous to embarkation, and its state of
discipline and appearance confidentially reported on. Such
a practice introduced into the navy would have the best
effects, both by encouraging emulation and exertion, and
preventing that fatal system of hurrying ships to sea in an
imperfect state of equipment.
" Another most important point to which too little at-
tention has le en paid since the peace of 1815, is our ar-
tillery practice. There can he no doubt that our reverses
during the American war are to be attributed, not only to
the great superiority of the ships we engaged, but to the
imperfect manner in which our officers and men had been
trained to the use of their guns. It will, perhaps, hardly
be credited hereafter, that there was at that time no re-
gular system of exercise established by authority in the
British navy, but that each ship had its own particular
plan and method, varying, of course, according to the ex-
perience and degree of information possessed by the captain,
as well as to the degree of importance Which he attached
to the subject. I need not detail the fatal negligence
which too often prevailed, and which became only known
in its full extent by its unfortunate results. At the con-
clusion of the peace, however, the officers of the navy were ,
unanimous and urgent for the immediate adoption of a
better system, and various suggestions were offered to the
Admiralty as to the best method of proceeding. Assum-
ing, as appeared most probable, that our ships would be
almost entirely in port, some recommended an exercising
ground at each naval arsenal, in which the crews of the
guard-ships, tee., might he regularly trained ; others pre-
ferred a ship fitted for this purpose; but all concurred in
the necessity of establishing some uniform practice. In
1817, Sir H. Douglas, an officer who combines an here-
ditary interest in the welfare of that service which owes so
much to his father, with all that science and experience in
war can afford, hid before the Board of Admiralty a most
valuable work, containing a series of suggestions on this
subject, which, if they had been properly attended to and
' acted upon, must have placed our system of artillery ex-
ercise on a very different footing from that on which it at
present stands. It does not, however, appear that between
1517, when he fir-t offered his manuscript work to the
Board of Admiralty, and 1819, when be requested their
permission to publish i', any attention was paid to the va-
luable suggestions with which it abounds, beyond issuing,
by authority, a sort of uniform manual exercise for the
great guns; and until 1827, when his Royal Highness the
Duke of Clarence became Lord High Admiral of England,
I was not able to observe that any effectual steps were taken
to introduce or enforce such a regular system of artillery
practice, especially amongst our ships on the borne stations,
as might enable us to keep pace with the improvements
rapidly introducing amongst our maritime rivals.
" During his Royal Highness's short administration,
much was undoubtedly accomplished by his own frequent
personal inspections of the ships in commission, and the
attention he paid to every thing which respected their
artillery ; but he was unfortunately too short a time in
office to establish any material or permanent improvements
in this part of our system ; and I cannot therefore do better
than give my readers in this place, and as nearly as pos-
sible in Sir H. Douglas's own words, a sketch of the plan
which he, twelve years ago, suggested to the Admiralty,
which, at the moment, appears to have been received with
entire approbation, but which since that time has not (as
far as I can learn) been thought worthy of further consi-
deration :--
"' When the navies of Europe, opposed to us in the
late war, had been swept from the face of the ocean by the
gallant achievements of the British marine, a period of
triumphant undisputed dominion ensued, during which our
seamen were not in general sufficiently practised in the
exercise of those weapons by which that dominion had
been gained, but, in the pride and ease of conquest, were
suffered, in many instances, to lose much of that p!ofi-
cienev in warlike practice which had been acquired in a
long series of arduous service. No one seemed to doubt
that the decided superiority which we had displayed in
every action- with a marine generally esteemed expert in
gunnery, was owing to a degree of permanent perfection ie
our own system, which, animated by the well-known gal-
lantry of our officers and seamen, would always ensure us
victory over the vessels of any other State, even in con-
flicts with superior force. Relying with too great confi-
dence on this persuasion, we were led to despise expected foes
whom we only rated on a level with those we had uniformly
beaten, and to engage rashly in very unequal contests with
the ships of a power whose practice we have since found
is not of that character which should render us satisfied
with the condition, or indifferent about the improvement
of our own.
" 'Reviewing carefully our naval actions with Euro-
pean enemies during the whole of the last war, and com-
paring them with the battles which were fought in that
which immediately preceded, there appears abundant
proof that the navies of Europe had very much dete-
riorated in the practice of gunnery. In the war which
terminated in 1783, the damage which our ships sus-
tained, even in combats with nearly equal forse, was in
general much greater than in the actions of the late French
war. It appears, indeed, that even in the later periods

of Napo on's reign, when he had certainly eifectd consi-
derable improvements in his marine, the state of practical
gunnery was still so wretched, that we have seen ships.
fully officered, superbly equ;pped, and strongly manned,
playing batteries of 20 or 30 heavy guns against our ves-
sels, crowded with men, without more effect than might
easily bare been produced by one or two well-directed
pieces ; and we have seen some cases in which heavy fri-
gates have used powerful batteries against Our vessels for a
considerable time without producing any effect at all.,
" ' The danger of resting satisfied with superiority over
a system so wretched as this, has been made sufficiently
evident. It consisted more in relative than is absolute
excellence. - We became too confident by being feebly op-
posed; then slack in warlike exercise, by not being op-
posed at all ; and lastly, in many cases inexpert for wait
even of drill practice; and herein consisted the great dis-
advantage under which, without suspecting it, we entered.
with too great confidence, on war with a marine much
more expert than that of any of our European enemies.

" ' The materiel of our navy is in the finest possible
condition, our ships arc greatly improved in every feature
of strength and warlike quality. Our ordnance is tl e best
in the world ; every species of store and equipment is
perfect. We possess excellent seamen, trained by thy,
operations of our commercial navy. Our officers, many
of them educated at public expence, are good navigators,
excellent astronomers, and are full of energy, activity, and
courage; but these elements and qualities are not sufficient
to constitute a good ship of war, unless the knowledge of
warlike science and practice be added; and that in a
manner to become immediately operative at the commence-
ment of a rupture. The practice of a long war, and the
talents of many distinguished officers, had formed some
expert crews of gunners ; but these benefits were partial,
and we shall undoubtedly lose, in peace, all or much of
that proficiency, unless we take special care ; and shall
have again to struggle through years of difficulty, only to
attain what we may not only secure from decay, but most
certainly further improve, and even render permanent,'"
We reserve to another opportunity the detailed
system of instrucAon recommended by Sir Howard
Douglas for the improvement of British seamen in
the use of artillery as a science.—Times.

Mr. Huskisson, in presenting the Liverpool pe-
tition on the subject of our relations with Spain and
Mexico, in the course of last night-, urged with great
force the propriety of preventing Spain from making
further attacks from the side of Cuba, on the now
liberated Republic of Mexico. There was a fur-
ther subject, and one of extreme importance, dis-
cussed by Mr. Huskisson in the course of his speech
—we mean the general prevalence of an opinion
that the United States covet a fine province of
Mexico, called Texas, and are disposed to have re-
course to violence, if necessary, for the purpose of
getting it into their hands. The province of Texas
extends southwards from the United States along
the coast of Mexico, and as such, the seizure of it
by the former Power could not be a matter of per-
fect indifference to Great Britain. The possession
of the Floridas by the United States has long since
given rational cause of uneasiness to England, from
regard to the safety of our West India islands; and
we agree with Mr. Huskisson, that when the
Government of Washington intimated its repug-
nance to seeing Cuba transferred from the
feeble Ferdinand to the vigorous grasp of George
IV., the United States should have been informed,
that if Cuba were to continue permanently
Spanish, so Texas, and in general the whole
shore along the Gulf, should enure to the Mexican
republic. The references made by the Right Hon.
Gentleman to communications, official as well as
private, from the late Mr. Jefferson, descriptive of
the eager and deep-rooted longings of the American
statesmen for slices of Mexico, and, above all things,
for the island of Cuba, will not, we are sure, be lost
upon the memory of his Majesty's Government in
its future transactions with the Spanish Cabinet,
with that of Mexico, and of the United States.
With Spain we have a defensive alliance, ready
made and consolidated by the most obvious interest,
to prevent Cuba from falling a prey to the syste-
matic aggrandisement of the United States. With
Mexico, again, we are equally identified in resistance
to the attempts of the same States upon Texas.
With the United States themselves we have no
relation but that of commercial intercourse so lung
as they will suffer ir, and of forbearance on other
points so long as our patience may not be too se-
verely provoked. We are bound to say that Sir
R. Peel completely succeeded in justifying Ministers
from the charge of insincerity or inconsistency as
regarded their duties towards the members of the
western hemisphere.—Times.

Our readers will recollect that we ventured more
than once, towards the close of last year, to suggest
that Parliament should meet as early as November,
on the ground that it would otherwise be impossible
to get through the business of the Session. It re-
quired no peculiar sagacity to foresee that many im-
portant questions must arise out of the state of the
country, in both its domestic and foreign relations,
which would supply the material of protracted de-
bate; besides which, there was a great arrear of
business from last Session, almost all matters of
practical importance having been postponed in con-
sequence of the length of time consumed by the dis-
cussion of the Roman Catholic claims. MS Ma-
jesty's Ministers, however, disdained to depart from
precedent-by advising Parliament to be convened at
an earlier day than the 4th of February. It is true
that precedent has been but recently established,
yet they seem to adhere to the practice more perti-
naciously than if it were " part and parcel"
of the ancient Constitution of the realm,
upon which, indeed, they did not fear to
" break in" with a sudden and violent spirit
of innovation. In essentials they are " liberal"
and ambitious of change, while their free-policy is
still trammelled by the bigotry of forms. Yet, the
other night, when Mr. Hume made some observa-
tions on the necessity of Parliament meeting at an
earlier period of the Session, or proceeding to busi-
ness each day at earlier hours, Sir Robert Peel half
admitted the 'former proposition, and perfectly ac-
quiesced in the latter. It is our opinion that both
propositions were correct, and that the commence-
ment of the Session and of the public business each
day ought to be earlier. We are now fast approach-
ing the period when Parliament is usually prorogued,
and yet how little has really been done, and how
much remains to do ! A great portion of the busi-
ness must again be thrown over to the next Session,
and among the rest, we apprehend, those magnifi-
cent plans cf legal reform which were ostentatiously
promised to the people in the Spetch from the
Throne. Thus, on account of the bigotted deference
which Ministers pay to the 4th of February, the
country is to endure all the evils avowedly con
nected with the administration of justice for
another year, besides many other grievances which a
Government that really possessed the wisdom to
which ours pretend, anti studied the public good
more than their own private interests and personal
convenience, would have delivered the public from
before now, whatever it might have cost them in
time and exertion. In fact, the arrears of business
in Parliament accumulate like the national debt, so
that at last it will be impossible to clear them off.
A Correspondent inquires what has become of the
measures relating to the new stamp duties ? and
wishes to know whether the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer will be content with having moved his
resolutions of 100 folio pages, and whether, after
all the anxiety and agitation occasioned by the new
propositions, he intends to postpone the business
till another Session ? He also asks chat would
become of some Ministers if the doctrine of " ex-
pedients.," and the practice of " postponements"
were to go out of vogue? There is one subject,
however, respecting which, as nature is said to abhor
a vacuum, so do Ministers abhor postponement—we
mean the supplies. The old and constitutional practice
of our ancestors, whose wisdom has been so much
sneered at by the mawkish patriots and infidel philoso-
phers of modern times, was to refuse voting the
supplies until they obtained a redress of grievances.
If that were the practice now-a-days—if we had
Representatives in Parliament who acted, not upon
the courtesy of modern arrangements, but upon
the examples of stubborn integrity by which the
better eras of our history have been distinguished--
they would soon put the practice of postponements

Alt of faihion. Ministers would be as prompt to
satisfy the reasonable demands of the people as
'hey are now backward to listen to their complaints.
They would hasten to redress grievances, that the
piincipal object of convening Parliament, the voting
if the supplies, might bor facilitated. Measures to
reform the administration of justice, and to remove
other causes of public dissatisfaction, would not be
merely spoken of in a speech from the Throne, or
flourished about in the fruitless verbiage of a Minis-
tel's eloquence; they would be carried into effect
with us little delay as possible, that the obstacles
might be removed which stood in the way of the
replenishing of the coffers of the Crown.—Morning
Herald.