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

The 247. EC, W. Beecher at Manchester,

-
Oa Saturday morning, on the occasion of a public
ke'akfast at the Albion Hotel in that city, the R.
Henry Ward Becher took leave of his Manchester
friends—at least as many of them as the large dia-
log saloon would accommodate—previous to his
departure for America. The Mayor of Rochdale
(Mr. G. L. Ashworth) presided.
The CIIAIRMAN bridly opened the meeting, and
in his observations said that they had assembled
there that morning to take their farewell of Mr.
Beecher, and to give the lie to tho3e who had said
that the people of England had now no sympathy
with that great question for which their forefathers
so gloriously and so successfully struggled—the
abolition of slavery. England always did sympathise
with the slaves, but nevertheless our Government
had done right and deserved our warmest support
in the courqe of neutrality which they had and
were pursuing on this great struggle in America.
After paying a tribute of thanks to Mr. Beecher for
the good he bad done in England by his recent
speeches, which bad set the public here right on the
American question, ho called upon
Mr. F. TAYLOR, who moved a resolution thank-
ing Mr. Beecher for his able and eloquent addresses
to the people of this country, hoping that he would
inform his friends in America that tho feeling here
was not one of hostility towards that country, but
one of friendship and sympathy. and assuring him
that he had their warmest wishes fora successful
journey, and for the success of the cause which he
80 ably advocated. Mr. Taylor particularly wished
Mr. Beecher to tell of the successful meetings that
had been held in England to hear him—meetings
such as the Southern sympathisers could not get up.
This was a fact, and if it was doubted he only said,
" Let Mr. James Spence and his friends try, even
in his own town of Liverpool, and see if the people
of that place even go with him."
Mr. J. PATTISON (Liverpool) seconded the resolu-

tion.
Several gentlemen having supported the resolu-
tion, which was unanimously agreed to,
The Rev. H. W. BEECHER rose, amidst loud
cheering,to return thanks. He commenced by saying
he deeply regretted that he could not begin what he
had to say with ladies and gentlemen, instead of
with gentlemen only. (Laughter, and a voice, "We
represent the ladies.") No, they did not. No man
could ever represent a woman. (Cheers and re-
newed laughter.) It gave him very great pleasure
that morning—and it would have given him still
greater pleasure if he had been blessed with the
power of feeling more—to meet so many kind and
valued friends. If he had done anything in Eng-
land towards converting them to the abolition and
Northern cause, he must confess he had also been a
convert towards England. While he had seen much
during his sojourn in this country of the prejudices
and misconception of the American question among
the people, he had seen much in himself that was
prejudice towards England and misconception of her
people. And it was not the smallest triumph that
he could say that in the small course of two or
three weeks during which he had spoken in Eng-
land, he had gained a victory over his past im-
pressions and prejudices. His English friends in
America, when he used to speak of England as he
could no longer speak of her, used to say to him—
" Ala, you don't knew Old England ;" and he used
to reply that he did ; but when he got back to
them he should say very humbly—" I did not know
England." (Loud applause.) The question on which
he had to speak was a great question—a broad, an
intricate, and a multitudinous question in its con-
tents—the American question ; the total of which
was the whole of human society. It was the top,
the bottom, the centre, and the circumference ; it
began here, and went there, and back again. There
was no question in morals, in philosophy, or any
other question in which humanity is interested that
was not involved in this great American question.
It was difficult, therefore, to always speak on a
question of such immensity and magnitude so as to
meet the requests of the audience. In Liverpool the
treatment to which he was subjected was, he felt
—arid he must do them the justice to say so—rather
an outbreak of party feeling than of opposition to the
liberty of free speech or sympathy with the Southern
cause. Tile speeches which he had made on this
question were not authoritative, inasmuch as they
had never passed under his hand or eye, and there-
fore he ought not to be charged with any inaccu-
racies that might be discovered in them—inaccu-
racies which arose from the hurry in which the re-
porters had to transcribe, summarise, and frequently
to take their notes, and not from any wilful misre-
presentation on their part. He was a newspaper
man, and he knew the difficulties connected with
reporting for the press; and especially when only
the summary of a speech had to be written, and the
writer was not well acquainted with the subject of
that speech. Hence, although summarised reports
might perhaps represent the tenor of his speeches,
still they del not always represent what he said,
and he should not, therefore, be judged by them.
Daring his visit to England the keynote to his pro-
gress here had been an attempt to use his informa-
tion so as to promote a better understanding and a
lasting peace between this country and America.
They wanted to draw closer the bonds of amity and
agoe,d fellowship. That had ever been his object in
d
eresaing the meetings he had attended in Eng-
Mni, although he had been warned by one paper,
D'filY News, he believed—and to which he wished
to bear testimony how glad ahe Americans were
that that paper had dared to pursue such a course
with regard to their conflict—the Daily News had
warned him not to touch upon such subjects—such
as the Trent affair, for instance—which were cal-
culated to alienate
p.,,thit,,s
of the Eog,l
fromiis him the feelings and sym-
people. Now, he did not
wieli to renew that
sueb.t.l'' helpnt as it was past and done
with, but he could e
asking them as Eng-
lishmen, whether, if the c
and had been vice versa,
they would not have felt
.d done on that occasion
what the Americans felt and did (Applause.) The
uews of the capture of Mason
and Slidell spread
rapidly over America, and
ever boV
d chuckled
with great glee, treating the
aa good joke,
but in two or three days some
lawyer ;
sent a letter
to the newspapers saying that the capture was all
very well, but there happened to be such
a power as England, and such a code
say aboutas
ter stational law, and what would they
iW
" bat is the law on this subject ?" every.
body asked every body
else,
and soon they
be-
ganfaces, although there was a /mi.
Wilkes had acted on an
to draw long
versa! conviction that Capt.
English precedent. That conviction still remained
with the Americans, and it was grounded on a fact.
The moment tile cepture was made known to the
Mr. Seward wrote to Mr.
American Government,
Ad ,ms, in London, a private note, which h© was re-
quested to read to Lord Russell (and which he did
read to Lord Russell), stating that they were
anxious to :settle any question that might be raised
thereon amicably and fairly. Some ten days after
that note had been received and read in England,
and efter it had oozed out that such a note bad been
received, the Morning Post, which was looked upon
as the semi officiet organ of the Governmen tfdeclared
that a communication had been received by the
English Government from the American Govern-
ment, but that it had no relation whatever to the
Trent affair, whereas the communication was on the
Trent affair and nothing else ; and to this hour that
phoaopri. er ha(ti_dp.
never retracted that most malicious false"'
P ) Many said those men should
have been ;given
without calling upon the English
Government t
makea demand for them to be so,
but that could not b
itinasmuch as the English
doctrine was that the;
neutral vessel containing caontraband a right to condemn a
ntraband of war without
prize
bringing her into acourt, as England did in
1807; whilst the Amercan doctrine or law was that
vessels containing contraband of
into a prize court. Hence the war must be taken
ent wanted to know from the erican Govern-
mEnglish Government
which law they proposed to act
nP°lll arid the
Eoglisb Government chose to act upon the Ame.nie
cen doctrine,
end they gave up the captured men.
The rev. gentleman then, in allusion to soma news.
paper attacks made upon him in consequence of his
remarks about the prosperity of America, repeated
that never since America was America had there
been more material and commercial prosperity
than there was in the Northern States at the pre-

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 prove'e goods.
Labour never was more abundant. Everybody had
empleyraeat for both head and hand, .-1,1 the mone-
tary effairs were easy and healthy, notwithstanding
the assertion of the Limes 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 be had described was the
result of an infleted 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 North than is
safe, when we have the means to convert it." A new
country must have credit, an old country did not
need it. Such being the fact, in about once every
10 years a commercial crash—a kind of miscella-
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 en-
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 500,000,000 of capital
of the North had been invested in the security
offered by the Governmeut, which, under another
name, was in America what the consols wore in
England. The Americans 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 bad been bad, The North had been poisoned
by slavery when the party now triumpha.nt 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 observations, 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-
head 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 my 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 about 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 those remarks in t he 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 cost 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 d ly 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 that
pratically £2,500,000 lhad 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. He was
appointed Engineer-in-Chief of Rifled Ordnance, and, of
course,thought his own guns were the best 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 invested guns and have done much for
the scientific development of the gunnery question, were
kept back. I don't mean to impute anything to Sir William
Armstrong, but I say his was an unfortunate 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 do if you confined your-
self to the invention of merely one man. (Applause.) Sir
William Armstrong started the ElawickOrdnance Company.
When he was appointed the Engineer-in-Chief of Ordnance
he retired, hut 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.
11Iany 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. Whiffle 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
his Grace the Duke of Somerset, who was himself examined
uPon this committee, as to the efficiency of the Armstrong
range and h
gun after all this enormous expenditure had been incurred.
The Duke of Somerset, in reply to question 5,012, said—
We had a report that the Armstrong gun had the greatest
g a,: the
the facts.greatest power of penetration of any gnu tried ;
whenn e y
have had great:
game to try it ourselves that was not confirmed by
The
Armstrong gun, at a great distance, may
Power of penetration, but for naval purposes
at 200 yards it
oer certainlyArmstron lied not the greatest power. Our
old 68-pounder is g'
more powerful gun than the 100-
t pheuynd had been at worgell." This was evidence given after
of money. Then,
a 68 pounder gun of thethte,
egai:r five years, and spent 21 millions
noble duke goes on to say that
style struck a harder blow at
short range than the 100.° d
to
quPeziotuinder Armstrong gun. His
Grace said, in reply
a:eldoboeiten allloo-pounders;
much an advantage to have
a10..5.103—" I thought it so
s cupola
throw a 100 lb. shot that I considerP°llllder :gun that could
Probable that the
:Pounder and a armament of the Warrior would h
and it was not until we tried a
68-
pounder teat I be
against Capt. Coles'
that the 63-pounder struck a harder blow thcame aware
pounder at short range." Other statements Waelle the 100-
the noble duke and other parties, with which
_e made by
I need nor
trouble you—but I ti ought it right to go briefly into this
, b 'et.use at this moment it excites
question,considerable in-
terest. America has guns of very great power and of very
great size;
in naval wars battles will be fought
at has told me that
ship that can deliver the hare
at close quarter ; that the
blows at 200 yards will be the most efficient ship; and the
Duke of Somerset, as You have already hear , has stated
that at short ranges the old 68-pun
mnoorteffictiehnatt
than the 100-pounder Armstrong gun. do say
inn that we can get;
the 68 pounder. is the most efficient g
but public attention has very properly been drawn to this
subject, and the next thing that eve must do is to see how,
in regard to naval guns of increased size and power we
can work them on board ship. Perhaps it may be said
that I should.apologise for going into these matters, but I,
for one believe that the Volunteer movement is an essential
part of the defences of the country; and that unless the
A Y, the Navy, and Volunteers are properly armed
and e •
quiPried we cannotexpectadequatelyto defend the
country • a
' and, as we ought to do, carry the war into tho .

enemy's camp, which is the proper way of banishing
intruders. (Hear, hear.) If we are to go into
this question of large gnus which has been talked of so
much, and which hasieeen looked after, not only with great
interest in this country, but with mare 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 can work the
largest and the heaviest guns. I know we can work guns of
from 15 to 20 tons with the greatest possible ease. Wo
cannot do that on board a broadside ship, and if our battles
are to be fought and won by ships with the heaviest arena,
went, the sooner we consider tho 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 1
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 cupola 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 largo 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, 1802, 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 bo 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 mouths 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 largo
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? If 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 our 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 onlooking
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 have spent from £30,000,000 to £33,000,000
in the last three years, and got a number of large WO
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
nobheacvaeuse I can pr
fear of their
thirbeem to b
being heard
ct. I
aeredrbreyanyboadsyseir,nt any place,
then,
there are only two ships capable of application to coas that
there tanadt
harbour defences; and that the two ships on Captain
Coles's
plan draw so much water that they are utterly useless for
the purposes they are intended for—namely, the defences of
our coasts and harbours; and, moreover,that they are neither
masted nor rigged, nor are they fit to be sent across the At-
lantic, It is in vain that Captain Coles has protested to our
Government against this state of things. He has urged
them to make those ships serviceable, 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 hereto-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.) What 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 that sort before very long,
we shall have to spend a large sum of money without being
in a position when the time really comes to meet the emer-
gency; and we shall in the end spend considerably mme
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. Cobdex in his conclusions. I don't
think it would do to abandon entirely our Government
dockyards; but I do 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 Goverament 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 Maudslay, 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 um 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 410 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 on the Alabama and the Florida, and
perhaps on other ships. (Laughter.) We have been ac-
customed to hear of the Americans 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 regard
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 be 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 tke question of dock accommodation for
ships of the Royal navy. (hear, hear.) Many gentlemen
here, no doub', 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
a few remarks on that point. Liverpool and Birkenhead have
400 acres of dock space, and 28 graving docks. The whole
o_ftihattetriiMecoatnjlelooysty's dockyards, including Chatham, Sheerness,
aveorretsmouth,
kfPoelgauyormtnooortuhfitihnv.,ge and other places, have only 41
.3h3ipsbsuolitfkedotehkeslpvaacrer,iaanrd tlhne
tnhuemmbeerrsoefy,grtanveinngthderockdasyis,
ao
tf themall
;buta w e capablehav have seen
soef e
n takingthat in
t
to go to Plymouth
mouth harbour
the time they
back to the south one part was obliged
woualndd another to Portsmouth, and Ports-
ims
xtthet takehe
w a
Admiral told me h.thems allin.
ey,vethrye
idea of coming up the
Mersey, and he got Gee of it alarmed atWthh
but he got into the
could do, and as we did it again, as safely as we
very large merchant shipsdo, e,
aleerY in the year with
householder in Birkenhead pays Zeah, ear.) Now, every
taxpayers, they are all interested in wilaerned therefore, being
I'll explain to you where some of it pea the money goes.
• Suppeteeg,