The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-23 00:00:00

mitted on all hands that mere economy would ruin the N'av
—( Hear, hear.) This spirit of parsimony, indeed, had ope-
rated for many years past, and naturally enough, no person
could be surprised at it, but the effects had been most per-
nicious—(llear, hear)—for it had forced upon Government
the necessity of "poring down" to the very quick- —( Hear,
hear.) His Noble Friend had said indeed that he had fallen
upon happier times, and that larger aids were granted to bins than
to preceding Governments. He congratulated his Noble Friend
on the improvement, but the remarkable thing was, that his
Noble Friend and those with whom he acted, were Opposed by
those who always considered it to be their duty to support /inn
whenever the interests of the country required it.—( Hear.)
The Earl of MINTO wished to explain one or two points
with respect to the Revenge ; he said, that ship was among
those which had been returned to him as complete in all re-
spects. It often happened, however, that when a mast was
wanted, one was taken from a demonstration ship, which was
subsequently supplied from the Dock-yards ; and as the Re-
venge was a demonstration ship, this might have caused the
_
temporary absence of a mast in that vessel. Then, as to sails,
he could not find in the returns any signs of the deficiency
which had been complained of.
The Earl of HARDWICKE—There is not in Plymouth
I),,ck-yard, a complete set of sails for a man-of-war.
The Earl of M INTO said that unless the returns were false
(which he could not suppose), that could not be the case. And
he must candidly say, that he did not place so much reliance on
the statements of Noble Lords as on these returns.
The Farl of HA RDWICKE affirmed that he retained his
conviction of the correctness of the statements he had made ; he
did not know when the returns to which the Noble Lord had
alluded were dated.
The Earl of .MlNTO—Previously to your information.
T e Earl of HARDWICKE—Then I believe them to be
false.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord MELBOURNE—My Lords, Ido not rise to enter into
the discussion which has been pursued with so much minute-
ness. I will, however, say a very few words on the general
principles by which the conduct of Government ought to be
guided on questions of this nature—questions of the very high-
est and deepest importance. My Lords, I think there was per-
fect truth in what was stated by a Noble Lord, who, for so
many years, filled the office of First Lord of the Admiralty—.
that naval affairs were not questions of a mere pecuniary nature
—(Hear)---but that they are questions on which the Govern-
mentought to act upon its own responsibility.—( Hear.) And
my Lords, it is on our responsibility that we have proposed the
naval estimates, and directed the First Lord of the Admiralty to
make that distribution and disposition of the naval force which
has been made. My Lords, it is my opinion that during peace
it is wise to reduce the establishments of the country as low as is
compatible with the safety of the country and the dutiest
which are to be discharged. And I was happy to near i
said by a Noble Lord, in the debate, that he sl d not conceive
it wise to look through the ports of Europe, and keep up as
strong a force as would be required to meet any sudden at-
tack from a foreign fleet. My Lords, what is that but war ?--
( Hear, hear.) It is depriving the country of the advantages
of peace, and incurring all the evils of war, especially that
greatest of all the evils arising from war, the exhaustion of the
national resources.—( Hear, hear.) But while reducing the
naval establishments of a country in time of pew-c, it is wise
in my opinion, to take care that the vessels be all ready to be
-quipped ; that foreign nations gain no superiority over us in
seamanship, in machinery, &c., and that we secure the bon_ fit
of all new discoveries in the carrying on of warfare.—( Hear. )
My Lords, it - has been said that we employed our vessels
on distant services, at Mexico, for instance, and leave
our own shores unguarded.—( Hear, hear.) But, my Lords,
if we are to have a reduced establishment in peace, we must
employ our naval force, where our interests require its aid and
protection,- some places must be left unprovided, but the ques-
tion is, whether it is not for the public interest that they
should be left unguarded, whether it is not consistent with
the public safety that they be left so unguarded. The Noble
Lord who brought forward this question made a great many
i very judicious, and unquestionably very able remarks. He
states the difficulty they would have in manning ships on a
sudden outbreak, and the difficulty of meeting any emergency,
That is not new ; I am old enough to have conversed with
Statesmen of other times, I might almost say ; and I never
heard of any other doctrine than that this country was always
slow in commencing war; that our wars are marked with tardi-
ness and error, and often ill success. I remember the Duke of
Richmond, Master-General of the Ordnance telling me that his
great reason for being unwilling to try an experiment of peace with
the great republic of France was this, '° If you make peace here,
the form of your Constitution and the feelings of the peopb:,
force you to disarm mere rapidly than any other nation -in
' Europe and you have more difficulties in arming again. It is
the old difficulty under which this country has always laboured •
it is a difficulty illustrated by the whole history of Lilo last cen-
tury—( Hear, hear)—and I do distinctly admit that it is a diffi-
culty which requires to be considered, and which we should
attempt by every means to meet and obviate ; and because
we have got over former dangers, it will not do to trust to the
good fortune of former times, which may have relieved us front
circumstances of very great peril and very great danger. The
Noble Lord has spoken very much of that which has engaged
a great deal of the attention of this country during the last
year, although, as the Noble Lord says, the public attention
was excited many years before, and that is the Russian fleet in
the Baltic. Surely this is not a question for the Admiralty—
this is a very great question of policy.--( Hear, hear, from the
Dbkc of Wellington.) I have no doubt whatever of the
pacific intentions of that power—l have no expectation what-
ever of any hostility from that quarter. I have a perfect re-
liance on the frank and loyal character of that Sovereign ;
while, at the same time, I do perfectly admit that it is not safe
to rely entirely upon the moderation of that or any other
power ; but that it is necessary and prudent to havea sufficient
security. But, my Lords, at the same time the security which
the Noble Lord proposes is not an effective security. Having
8,9, or 10 sail of the line at home here, is no security against
that fleet, supposing it was actuated by hostile intentions and
design. if we were to apprehend enmity and hostility from that
quarter, it would be absolutely necessary that we should put a
much larger force in commission—incur a m"eh larger ex -l'n- e e
—and make a much greater exertion than that which has '
stated by the Noble Lord. That Noble Lord says been
very truly
that we are not to wait for—that we are not to expect maul_
festes—are not to rely on declarations of war being given—and
cites instances in which ho.tilities had commenced, and violence
been committed, without any declaration of war. Certainly it
is true that we are not to rely on manifestos and declarations
of war, but we are not to expect that it would come upon us
like a thunder clap. Hostilities, in the present day, du not
come on suddenly. There are disputes, or somethmg arise ‘,
which gives us the - opportunity of making preparations
against any danger whatever that may come ups us (Hear,
hear)---ana the question is, whether the Navy is not in such
a state as would afford the germ or nucleus of any efficient force
that might be required by any danger of that nature; for one, I
beg leave to say that I do not in the slightest degree apprehend
any danger of that sort, because I do believe, notwithstanding
ombiaekeEarleh‘.vin bring-
some unfortunate differences have taken place on some matters
.that may. be somewhat difficult to explain,
otrhwa_thitchh:rie ismories
PoWer in F.`urope more sensible of the great advantages to 'be
s
derived from friendship with Great Britain
e ]Noble Lord'sflaeielit:
. to
ibnealui believe,
ethatalid
inclined to friendship than the Power which possesses that
and which has been made the subject of th
the course recently taken by the Admiralty madversion. Every Noble Lord has admitted, I
their approbation. My Lords, it is not my
into the particular parts of this discussion,
13;:nitri
isrennteinnenttintloedntetor
thousopposite ht
(Earl tm y
question.
observations
gdnutidyet;,,stitartLe
ntrhdeshg7seri
nalthperinetc,inpsliedsertahtuitnnounofhtetht;
Nuomble Earl for
a ther d s
i n Lordreply. OilieCtl beggedES T E
toßa
assure
ehti onlyhn
Noble
feeling
thanked jAnlgi nftnor)wtahradt
thishe hgande ns
question,
npne,r snonndal
hf eeelt
the courtesy with which he had (as indeed he all,va
an-
swered his observations. He could not help thinkingks (lid) '
ought to make some preparation, and if we that we
could not afford
to keep up such a force as Russia, we ought
at least to ask
Russia to
reduce in proportion to us. Theie
precedents fit or such a course —he believed . were
such a demand made upon Prance in 1803 that led t was
He would not press £;,ra return of the distribution of the
the war.
il
if the Noble Earl opposed it; but he held in his hanttle ships
publishetillUder the authority of the Noble Earl .at le a book
least under
the authority of the Admiralty—in which the whole of the sta-
tions were named.

The Earl of MINT° said the book had no authority from the
Admiralty,
The returns were then ordered, and the House adjourned till
Monday.

lIOUSE OF COMMONS, FER. 29.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at five minutes before Four.
Sir G. GREY, for Devonport, and Mr. MAXWELL, for
Cavan, took the oaths and their seats.
Mr. W. ATTWOOD presented a petition from the
in-
habitants of Greenwich for leave to bring in a I3ill to erect
a
STUART presented a petition for leave to
c
Cmi. etNemr. r y.
bring in a Bill to enclose certain lands in the county of
Waterford.
Mr, DUGD A L E brought in a Billh filcoz‘irali tlN?aeasypretclar,dpnoaisp.ef;ilne:syft
enablingtoraist
raise an
ailt' e a
ddi Londonti o
na l
saunmd 0 Birminghamf
money,
n
and second time.
The HoN. MEMBER also brought in the Rugby and
Warwick Road Bill, which was read a first and second time.
Mr. HODGSON H a
INDE presented petition for
leave to bring in a Bill to make a dock at llvthe Sir JOHN 0 W EN presented a petition from some place
in Rutlandshire, the name of which we could not catch,
stating that in the event of a repeal of the Corn-laws
certain lands would be thrown out of cultivation, and pray_
ing the House not to consent to a repeal of those laws.
Mr. FITZGIBBON presented a petition from Lime-
rick, against any alterations in the Corn-laws.
Mr. HOGG presented 16 petitions from parishes in the
West Riding of Yorkshire, to the same effect.
SEAMEN'S WAGES.
Sir E. CODRINGTON presented a petition from the
seamen of North Shields, praying for a redress of the griev-
ances under which they laboured. The petitioners
stated that they were not entitled to any wages, on_
less the ship performed her voyage in safety. If a canal
or drainage was undertaken, the men were entitled to be •
paid for their wages. but in the case of seamen, if a te„,,,
went out to the \Vest Indies, and before her arrival
back the ship happened to be lost, lie was not paid etie
farthing. The petitioners prayed to be placed on the same
footing, in this respect, with other classes of her Majesty's
subjects.
Mro.r. BRUGESsystem
of presentedations' apetit
educationion from Bath,
on the
pray-
ing
f
Scriptures.
CORN-LAWS.
Mr. W. DUNCOMBE prensfetnhteedcaoprent.iitailovnc from Rich_
VILLIEI?,,S presented a from Wisheach
nfrooomth,Bati
nfoi
roi‘ntile:re.,
repealork, against
ca repealorn.
litw s .
petition . .
Lord DUNGANNON presented a petition in favour of •
the Corn-laws.
The NOBLE Loan also presented a petitioany
, against the
ford, against any grant to the College of M.
praying for an investigation into that institution.
Mr. PENDARVES presented a petition from the
Guardians of the Poor-law Union at Redruth
Beer Act ; and praying also for the establishment of the
Rural Police.
Lord HENNIKER presented petitions from parishes in
Suffolk against any repeal of the Corn-laws.
CHURCH EXTENSION (SCOTLAND).h
Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from the Preshy.
tery of Glasgow, praying for the extension of the Chord
of Scotland.
Sir G. CLERK presented two petitions of a similar na-
ture from Orkney.
Mr. MILD MAY presented a petition from Winchester
against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from the
gosptet any
yon alto:
I I 01- :
the C
Northern and Eastern Railway Company, praying for
•
leave to bring in a Bill to extend their powers. '
LAWS.
Mr. H E ATb IlyCl , 00
OTa Ey 0
csons,presented
against
aia
beachO signedrn-laws,
Mr. O'CONNELL presented petitions from
and Oswestry, praying for the total and immediaf
of the Corn-laws, in the prayer of which he heal

..,;,~