The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-06 00:00:00

POLAND.

Mr. HENNESSY (Lord Palmerston not yet being in
his place) postponed asking an important question of which
he had given notice until to-morrow.
POOR. LAWS.

return,

Mr. HIBBERT asked the President of the Poor Law
Beard whether it was his intention to move for the reap-
pointment
of the select committee on the administration of
the poor laws; and, if so, whether he would defer the in-
troduction of the bill to continue the poor law board until
such committee should have reported to the house ?
Mr. VILLIERS replied that it was his intention to move
for the re •appointment of the committee referred to. He
should lay the report ou the table of the house before he in-
troduced the bill to continue the Poor-law Board.
NEW WESTMINSTER BRIDGE—BRIDGE

STREET.
Sir J. SHELLEY asked the First Commissioner of
Works, when the houses left standing on the south side of
Bridge-street were to be entirely removed, and whether or
not arrangements have been made with the tenants in
possession for giving up their interests; if not, what was
the course the Office of Works intended to pursue with
regard to that portion of the property ?
Mr. COWPER replied that several of the houses on the
south of Bridge-street had been removed, and the whole
of them would be taken down without any unreasonable
delay. All the owners had been agreed with excepting Fen-
dall's Hotel, a place of much resort during the sitting of
Parliament, which would not be interfered with for a short
while longer, so that the public purse would not be unduly
trenched upon at present for compensation.
The Royal Marriage—The Procession and

the Arrangements.
Sir G. BOWYER asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department whether, having regard to the desire of
the citizens of London to show all possible respect to her
Royal Highness the Princess of Denmark, and the wish of
the public outside the City to see the full solemnity of the
procession next Saturday, arrangements would be made for
the Lord Mayor and the City procession to attend her
Royal Highness as far as Paddington? (Hear hear.) It
was, he believed, generally understood that the procession
would proceed from Temple-bar to Paddington at a rapid
pace.

Captain STACPOOLE inquired if any suitable places
had been reserved for members of that house?
Sir. G. GREY replied that this was the first time he
had heard that the procession would proceed at a rapid
pace from Temple-bar to Paddington. This would most
certainly not be the case. (Hear.) He thought, however,
that he explained the whole course of proceeding the
other night. The city authorities would retire from the
cortege at Temple-bar, giving way then to the authorities
of Westminster. The Lord Chamberlain had within
the last few hours received a letter from
and
Lord
at
Mayor expressing his entire satisfaction, d
of the other City authorities, at the arrangements
ent. All that had
m
been concluded in concurrence with the Government.
the arrangements had been finely made,(; hear.) The
and,
he believed,
to the satisfaction of all parties. Hear,
y th
e
authorities of other districts throuiaguhawdhesicirhe
would pass bad expressed ed thoeteparti cession
respect and loyalty, and the Government had deemed it
right to afford such parties the arties the fullest opportunity of
hear.) If therefore, all parties, the
City authoritiesdoing so. (Hear,th had determined to accompany the
procession to the end of included,a
route,
great delay and confusion
could not have failed to result.. (Hear, hear.) No place
had been prepared for members of that house. No parties
waodu d tale part, in the procession, which, as he
had already said, would consist of six carriages
except the city and other authorities fairly entitled by
their authority and jurisdiction to constitute a part of it.
Sir G. BOWYER, declared that the right hon, baronet
had not completely answered his question. (Cries of
t, Hear, hear.")
Sir G. GREY added that the civic procession would
not proceed any further than Temple Bar. The other
authorities, who were very numerous, would conduct the
cortege to Paddington.
THE NIGHT OF THE ILLUMINATIONS.

Mr. WALTER inquired what arrangements had been
made on the night of the royal marriage for the passage of
carriages along the streets I)
Sir G. GREY replied that he had been in communication
with the Chief Commissioner of Police on the matter, and
it had been arranged that space would be kept in the streets
to enable carriages to pass to and fro. (Hear, hear') ..
Mr. PAULL asked a question with react to the
sheriffs.
Sir G. GREY replied that the Sheriffs of London being

Sheriffs of Middlesex likewise, would continue with the

procession to its termination at Paddington.
An HON, MEMBER asked what arrangements had. been

7ade with respect to liyde-park ?

"-- -vw
mr. PLR replied that carriages would be allowed
to pass through tug line of volunteers ; but, as there would
be vast numbers of people on foot, no horsemen would be
allowed, save those connected with the royal cortege or in
connection with the volunteers
Sir G. GREY said he had just received a letter from
the city authorities to the effect that if they could not have
precedence in the procession they preferred to go no further

than Temple-bar. (Laughter.)
TREASURE TROVE,
On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Sir J. JERVOISE rose to call attention to two circulars

addressed to tho chief constable of tho county of Hants.

dated respectively, Whitehall, Aug. 27, 1860, and White.-
hall, Jan. 9, 1861, on the subject of treasure trove,
The SPEAKER being summoned by the Black Rod (Sir
A. CLIFFORD), repaired to the House of Lords to hear the

Royal assent given by commisaion to several bills. On his

Lord PALMERSTON explained the part he took in the
raneaction.

Dlr. F. PEEL explain- d the mode of action in regard to
found property arri treasure trove.
Obsolete Vessels of War.
Mr. COB ,EN aid—Sir, in the terms oi the notice I have
given, I beg to offer a few words on the subject of the great
number of obsolete vessels of war in the ItDyal Navy,mean-
ing by "obsolete" vessels which have been useful in their
day, but which circumstances and time have rendered use-
less. If it should be said that this is no longer a practical
question inasmuch as in committee of supply, sub silentio,
but not without individual protest, a vote has been passed
enabling the Government to maintain 76,000 men for the
Navy of the year,l beg to say in reply that 1 do sot acknow-
ledge that vote as necessarily Anal. It will be in the power
of the house, if it think proper, on subsequent and more im-
portant stages of the measure, to review and, if necessary,
to reverse the vote. After the remarkable utterances made
by a Conservative peer in another place, to which we must
not more particularly allude, expressing disapprobation of
the excessive number of men voted for the Navy this year,
I think it cannot be deemed improbable that this question
will again come under the cbnsideration of the house. I
will describe what I mean by obsolete ships of war. In the
last return presented by the Admiralty to the house it is
stated that there are 558 wooden steamvessels, 106 of which
are line-of-battle ships or large frigates; the remainder
being 452 vessels of lesser dimensions,ranging from corvettes
to the smallest gunboats. Now, with the smaller class of
vessels Ido not propose to deal. My remarks apply exclu-
sively to the 106 wooden line-of-battle ships or large frigates.
The smaller vessels, although built of wood, and, therefore,
liable to destruction from the combustible missiles which

have rendered obsolete the larges ones, may and must be
serviceable in barbarous and uncivilized regions, and may

be used as a sort of police of the seas. Of the large vessels
of war 66 are wooden steam line-of-battle ships, and 40 are
large frigates. In speaking of the latter vessels, let me
mention that 35 of them are upwards of 2,000 tons, and
14 upwards of 3,000. Therefore they average a larger
tonnage than Nelson's line-of-battle ship the Vic-
tory, which was under 2,200 tons. When I call these
large wooden ships obsolete, I do not speak on
my own authority. lam not uttering a truism that is even
new. The circumstances out of which the fact has arisen
are of no very modern date. They sprang from a discovery
nearly 20 years old—the discovery of an eminent French
artillerist, which enabled bombshells to be projected horizon-
tally with all the precision of round shot, instead of, as for-
. . .

merly, in a parabolic direction through the air. As it is neces-
sary to pin opponents to the point at issue, I beg to say that
the wooden line- of•-battle ships have been rendered obsolete

not by the adoption of the iron-clad gunboats or ves-
sels of war. No doubt iron-clad impenetrable vessels of
war have rendered these wooden ships additionally and con-

elusively useless, but they were objectionable and open to
condemnation before ever an iron-cased gunboat went to sea,
remember—for lam an old scholar in these things, for

which, indeed, I have no taste, but which have been forced
on my attention—l remember in 1849 sitting on a commit-
mittee to inquire into the Ordnance. Before that commit-
tee Sir T. Hastings, then occupying an important position

at the head of the gunnery establishment, stated that in
consequence of the adoption of those shells with horizontal
motion, if we went into a sea fight with 25 line-of .battle
ships, instead of the action lasting 10 hours, as such events
used to do, it would more likely be over in 10 minutes, and,
instead of our coming out of it with all our ships, we would
probably lose half of them, The American Government,
having very little money to spend on the navy, have shown
much more forethought than we have. They have never
constructed a line-of-battle ship for the last 20 years. They
abandoned these ships not because iron vessels came into
use, but because they found swift corvettes and such like to
be safer vessels than the large cumbrous three-deckers which
offered so broad a target to the incendiary shots. We have
also had two or three expressions of opinion on the subject
from authorities at home. The hon. and gallant member for
Ilarwich, speaking lately on this question, said that a shell
now acted as a mine, it burst on passing through the side of
a vessel, and would so shatter it that a line-of-battle ship
would be nothing better than a slaughter-house. Again, the
hon. and gallant member for Wakefied, who is an authority in
these matters, has told us of an experiment where shells
were tried on a brig which was on fire at the twelfth round.
It seems, then. that half a broadside sets a vessel in flames
beyond the possibility of extinction. Such being the case,
other countries, long before we took the hint, ceased to build

large vessels of war. We have continued to build them, and
we have now got the number of which I have spoken: Ido
not undertake to blame anyone because we have got some
line of-battle ships in hand. Whenever a change takes place
we must experience some loss in a heavy residue of useless
articles ; but I have a great grievance to allege against the
Admiralty of successive Governments for having left us

with so enormous a number of useless and obsolete ships of

war. With whom, then, does the fault lie ? It is admitted
on all hands to be a fault. Will anybody of nautical ex-
perience, with a head on his shoulders and a reputation to
care for, get up and tell me that if these 106 large frigates and
line-of-battle ships had not been in existence one of them
would now be regarded as a useful vessel of war. (Hear.) If
nobody will venture to say so, we may safely conclude that
these vessels are quite useless. If we had wooden vessels
of war to oppose to wooden vessels of war, it might be said,
" other countries have got these line-of-battle ships, and it
is therefore necessary that we should have them too ;" but
the production of iron-clad vessels, and especially of impe-
netrable gunboats, has rendered these line-of-battle ships,
not only additionally useless, but actually a danger and a
snare, because it is now frankly acknowledged that a single
gunboat making its appearance is a sufficient justification
for any number of these wooden vessels to take to their
heels and run away. (Hear, hear.) What has happened in
America? A blockade established by these wooden vessels
has been raised by one iron gunboat. Another iron vessel im-
provise for the occasion, made of railway iron, in one of the
Southern ports, where the people are not apt in mechanical
contrivances, suddenly made its appearance, and in almost a
few minutes massacred the whole crew of one of the largest
wooden frigates in the American navy,—a ship larger, I
believe, than any of our frigates. Nay, more, if another
iron-clad vessel had not come to the rescue, it is the opinion
of the best nautical authorities that that single iron-clad
would have cleared the whole coast of Northern America of
wooden vessels. (Hear.) If that be so, and nobody will
gainsay it,what follows? We have 106 of these large wooden
vessels, which in all former times would have been regarded
as the very mainstay and strength of England, but which are
now of no advantage to us, give us no strength as against
a foreign enemy, and which indeed are actually a weakness
and a danger. If we were at war to-morrow I challenge any
naval officer in. this house or out of it to say that we would
send any one or all of these large wooden ships to oppose a
single iron-clad vessel that may now be possessed by France
or the United States. (Hear, hear.) Such being the case
it is quite clear that we are in a dilemma of a very serious
kind, and one which calls for the consideration of every man
who has the interests of his country at heart. How is it
that we have arrived at this state of things ? Is it because
some new invention has suddenly surged up, taking us un-
awares, and leaving no choice to the Admiralty but to con-
tinue the manufacture of these large wooden ships ? Quite
the contrary. We have had warnings from all directions.
rfroaismedFirnanoucer
oanwßd
oAounmetrriyca,byatithde
all proclaiming for years that
warningmosthave
vn
oe hadincte
on
ahuatve c warningsabene
nanticahavl.men,
we were coming to this. I think it is honourable to naval
men that they have so frankly declared the worthlessness of
these large wooden ships of war, because no doubt the
poetry and romance of the navy are thought to be associated
with the quarter decks of our line-of-battle ships. There
appears at first sight something less noble, less dignified in
a Monitor or a Merrimac than in a line-of-battle ship. lam
not disposed to agree with that. I think power, wherever
it is—intellect, wherever it is—give the real rank in the
world—(bear)—and I believe that the naval authorities,
in abandoning the traditions of the old wooden ships and
espousing the cause of Captain Coles's cupola ships, and
other inventions, not only show true patriotism, but take a
wise view even of their own interests as professional men.
(Hear.) According to Mr. Scott Russell, who ought to know,
we have probably spent during the last eight years about
£30,000,000 hi the material of a wooden navy that is now
useless. I take the 106 ships I have spoken of as having
Cost, with their contingents, £20,000,000,
I won't
Admiralty is accountable for the whole of £2o,ooo,ooo,thisythe
but I firmly believe that the naval administration is fairly
responsible for the loss of £10,000,000 of it.. lon of large
believe
£10,000,000 has been wasted in the cons
' wooden vessels since other countries have known,tructl and
Government ought to have known, that these line-of-battle
ships would be useless. (H ear.) With whom must the
blame rest P I think it should be divided between the two
sides of the house, or, at all events, the two front benches-
-for I hope the other benches will be able to ab-
so(alviaeuthglemselves from responsibility. Igo back to the time
when the right hon. baronet the member for Droitwich was
First Lord of the Admiralty, in 1859. He began what he
called a reconstruction of the navy. It was no reconstruction
of the navy. It was the conversion of great wooden line -of-
battle ships into screw vessels, after he knew other countries
had abandoned these censtructions. I hold in myhand a paper
of a very curious kind,which I wonder has not attracted more
attention in this how*. It is now somewhat out of date, It is