The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-23 00:00:00

WEST INDIAN AND PACIFIC STEAM NAVI-

GATION.
The annual meeting of this company was held in Liver-
pool yesterday—Mr. F. A. Clint in the chair.
The report and accounts, proposing a dividend at the
rate of 7 per cent, per annum, having begn taken as read,
The CHAIRMAN said that in a short time they would
have a fleet of 19 steamers, nine of which would be new.
They had now thoroughly organised the company, and they
believed that the general prospects of increased trade apd of

- to the company were hopeful and
increased progptlnty
cheerful.
4;nn of
Mr. B. HALL moved as an amendment to the actop.—

the report, with reference to the management of the com-
pany, that it be taken away from the present managers, and
that the number of the directors be reduced.

After a stormy discussion the amendment was negatived
by 25 votes against 16.
The report and statement of accounts were then adopted.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—The Navy Estimates, of which we yes-
terday gave an outline, may be expected to suggest
considerable discussion, for the topics of interest in-
cidentally furnished by some of the proposed votes
are unusually prominent. Foremost of all stands
the actual, or rather the comparative, efficiency of
our ironclad fleet. The Estimates tell us of the
sums to be expended, but are silent about the re-
sults to be produced. Yet we cannot avoid mea-
suring these results by the results obtained else-
where and under different systems. This time it
will not be the navy of France, but the navy of the
United States which will challenge comparisons.
There will be no escape from the discussion, for the
Americans themselves are at once candid and con-
sistent in forcing it upon our notice. Their journals
argue as if peaee with the South necessarily meant
war with England, and so freely is the contingency
debated that within the last few weeks a Federal
Admiral, in an official report to the Secretary of the
Navy upon the performances of the fleet under his
command, describes one of his ironclads as compe-
tent to " destroy any vessel in the French or British
Navy, lay their towns under contributions, and re-
turn again—provided she could pick up coal—with-
out fear of being followed." We trust that the
occasion for such international visits may not arrive;
we entertain grave doubts of the justice of the Ad-
miral's estimate ; and we are not much alarmed for
the reputation pf the European navies. But at the
same time we are bound to take such speculations
into our consideration, the more so, indeed, as we
have once before found the Americans unexpectedly
ahead of us in the construction and armament of
ships of war. There is no need of a new " panic."
We believe that both in actual strength and prospec-
tive resources we are prepared for any emergency ;
but it will certainly be asked whether the proposed
expenditure of ten millions places the British
Navy on that footing which our position requires.
The question will turn mainly on the turret prin-
ciple and the capacity of armament which that
principle furnishes. For the Americans, it may be
said that they have succeeded in sending very heavy
guns to sea in small vessels. Their Monitors are
only of about 1,000 tons burden, and yet they carry
heavier ordnance than we have yet placed on board
ironclads of six times the tonnage. That the casual-
ties among vessels of this class have been numerous
is true, and that they are incapable of taking long
voyages without eminent risk is true also ; but they
have been known to ride out a gale on the Atlantic
coast with as much ease as their wooden consorts,
and they are certainly, therefore, effective in their
own waters. Nor is it clear that they could not on
an emergency, and at a certain hazard, be sent
across the ocean, so that it is incumbent upon us to
examine their alleged capabilities without prejudice,
and to ascertain, if possible, on what presumption
the Americans have adhered so tenaciously to this
peculiar model. In this inquiry we cannot do
better than take the Monadnock as a specimen of the
navy which is compared with our own. This is
the ship of which Admiral Porter so confidently
boasted, and if we cannot undertake to say what she
might do upon trial, we can, at any rate, describe
her construction, and infer her probable qualifica-
tions. The Monadnock is a vessel of the Monitor
type, built in the Government navy-yard at Bos-
ton, but she is half as large again as the original
ships of her class, measuring 1,564 tons instead of
1,000. Admiral Porter spoke of her sides as par-
ticularly " strong and thick," but we can state with
greater precision that her armour consists of five or
six one-inch plated, screwed to her sides and to each
other by numerous small bolts. She carries, we
presume, as Admiral Porter does not record any
exception on this point, the usual Monitor arma-
ment of 450-pounders. If we proceed, however, to
examine the grounds of the Admiral's confidence in
this vessel we shall be somewhat perplexed to dis-
cover her advantages. He says of the Monitors in
~general that their fire, compared with that of a
broadside vessel, is " very slow and not at all cal-
culated to silence heavy batteries ;" and also that it
is less accurate than that delivered from a broad-
side. He further says that he " does not know yet
what their real durability is," or how they would
sustain a continuous fire against their turrets,
adding, indeed, that he himself would prefer
going into action in a wooden vessel. Still be sub-
joins, " the principle is a good one, if the vessels
were all built like the Monadnock ;" but he does not
tell us that the Monadnock excels the other Moni-
tors in any of the respects above-mentioned, that
she can deliver her fire more rapidly or more accu-
rately, or that he is better persuaded of her durabi-
lity. Indeed, at last he upsets the case on her be-
half, for he frankly states that no vessel that he had
ever seen—not even the Monadnock—" came up to
his idea of what was required for offensive opera-
tions as much as the Ironsides." But the Ironsides
is a broadside vessel, one of the few which the Ame-
ricans have constructed on that principle, and not
comparable in tonnage or armour to our largest fri-
gates. True, he thinks she " would be no match for
the Monadnock in a fight;" but this is solely on ac-
count of the Monadnock " having more speed ;" so
that it is by speed alone, and not by either offensive_
or defensive strength, that this wonderful vessel
would be expected to beat even a second-rate Iron-
clad of the European model. Now, the speed of a
fighting ship is undoubtedly a most important point
in her capacities, but what the speed of this Monad-
nock may be is the very thing which we are not told.
All we know is that she beats the rest of the Moni-
tors and the Ironsides ; but we also know that the
ordinary speed of the American Monitors does not
exceed seven knots an hour, so that the Monadnock
may well eclipse them, and yet be a slower vessel
than ordinary ironclads of the British Navy. Our
readers will be rather puzzled to imagine, after this
explanation, how the Monadnock could do such
great things as Admiral Porter expects from her. If
our theories are correct and our experiments trust-
worthy, a single 68-pound shot from one of the old
smooth-bore guns would, at short range, go through
her armour. Unless her speed is fully double that of
the Monitors generally, she would have little advan-
tage over our ships on that head, and though she
does carry a very heavy gun or two her fire from
these ponderous pieces of ordnance would be com-
paratively
slow and uncertain. We do not, then,
think it very probable that in the event of a war
with America our ships and seaports 'would be at
the mercy of Admiral Porter and the Monadnock ;
but. it would be unwise in the extreme to pass the
subject without notice or inquiry. The Americans
are certainly placing heavier gwis on smaller ships
than any other people, and though their favourite
cannon has just been unequivocally condemned they
have other patterns in use. We think we must be
entitled to say, after the action in Mobile Bay, that
the Federal artillery cannot be superior to our own.
On that occasion a dozen vessels, together mounting
the most powerful guns known to their service, ham-
mered half through the day at a single iron-clad ram
without knocking a hole in her, though we must be
strangely deceived in our calculations if one of our
own ships would not have sent her to the bottom in
ten minutes. At any rate, we can riddle with our
guns targets three times as strong as the sides of the
Tennessee. So we do not profess to be alarmed by
the predictions of American Admirals, but-it is still
only prudent to keep our eyes open to events. They
could meet our 100-pounders with 300-pounders or
450-pounders. Would this advantage compensate
their inferiority of armour and general lack of speed?
Would one of these enormous shot, though propelled
with a low velocity, produce a fatal effect on the
plating of frigates ? Will weight of metal tell de-
cisively in action : and, if so, must we have turret-
ships to carry this weight of metal ? These are in-
quiries which will inevitably be suggested by the
proposals to be made on Monday next. We do not
believe that we are on a wrong course, but it is at
least remarkable that the nation which professes to
be our rival and speculates on being our enemy has
taken a very different course, and believes that
course to be the right one.
HERALD.—EarI Russell takes considerable credit
to himself for having prevented the war between
Denmark and Germany from becoming a general
war. He is never weary of boasting that; by his dis-
cretion and coolness, he averted a conflict which his
prophetic eye foresaw would have deluged Europe
with blood, and (upon which he lays even more
stress) irretrievably damaged " the cause of pro-
gress." With arms akimbo he denounces those reck-
less politicians who would have conjured up a war
to prevent the disintegration of Denmark, which
disintegration he proves to his own satisfaction
Denmark thoroughly deserved. His utterances in
Parliament and elsewhere show that he is now de-
cidedly of opinion—or rather that he considers it
convenient to express the opinion—that Denmark
was wrong throughout the quarrel, and was entitled
to no assistance from the Powers who were parties
to the Treaty of 1852. He invites the nation to offer
up thanksgivings that a statesman of such eminent
prudence and patriotism was charged with the con-
duct of its foreign relations during the past year,
and his one time fire and fury breathing organs—
now very lambkins—take up the same strain, and
proclaim him the saviour of his country. A more
impudent political fraud was never attempted even
by the noble lord. The fact is, that Earl Russell
did his utmost to make the war general ; that he
proposed to the neutral Powers, not once but thrice,

an
to go to the assistance of Denmark, and address
ultimatum to Germany ; and that the outbreak of a
terrible war was only prevented by the refusal of
Franz
,to act with a Minister whose treachery she
had so,
shortly bei't;
such immense importance. ,
In January, 1864,
to
lordship invited France, Russia,
:se experienced in a matter
enter into a new quadruple alliance, with e °
d Syl,cdenbtect
re
of maintaining the Treaty of London,
to explain, in reply to the inquiries of those C,l°if
as to what he really meant, that he proposz4g,
moral force was not sufficient, to appeal t° Pre
cal force. The proposal was refused • it waAssrtil
and took. ru:tg
newed shortly after with the same effect. 'hip
this fact the country called upon by his lords
con,
to thank him for keeping peace, and to t
Sider Denmark the true author of the war, (1,11F,D0
to be familiar—his lordship's dispatches have n't,
published. Very few persons, however, 03es
aware that six months afterwards, when the, dr, of
were in possession, not only of Schleswig
Jutland, when the Danish army was
annihilated, and the Danish people exhaustedL.,
dispirited, his lordship invited France to join ----17 d
land in addressing an ultimatum to Austria r,
Prussia, imposing upon those two Powers than,
ticular terms of peace which his lordship ha Such,
Covered for himself to be the fitting ones•
however, is the fact ; the Minister who a tP;iech
of June declared the quarrel to be one in rupart
England ought not to interfere, whose tender heart
was so affected at the idea of extending he gar, • it
and especially at the thought of the iniser„.)t
might occasion to Austria and Prussia, who til°T:er.
Denmark had brought all her calamities upon
the
self, and had no title to ask help, applied t°
to
French Government in the beginning of to Jti,lideoo
agree upon a division of Schleswig—i.e.l.
his lordship's line of the Dannewerke and the
and to compel Austria and Prussia by force 01 "-vie
if need should be, to accept the arrangement. jilt,
French yellow book supplies this interesting 04
tration of the noble lord's candour, consisteill'ctivo
good faith. Buried in that dull and unattra to
volume is a. despatch from M. Drouyn de ,110,
the Prince de la Tour d'Auvergne, the Frene'ti, of
bassador at the English Court, dated the 10 Go'
June, which gives the reasons of the French do
vernment for declining this proposal. M. Prelver-
Lhuys says in substance that he had had
sation with Lord Cowley, in which his lordship and
of establishing an agreement between Frauci,etbeY
England as to the tracing of a frontier, wniel, 3fid
should sustain as an ultimatum. The Fren4ord
nister proceeds to say that he had remincleui ova
Cowley of the position which France had „
throughout upon this question. „We
said, " obliged to act with a circumspectionia,,°pea;
posed upon England. ThatPowerwas bounur and
mark by the relationship of the two dynast'e; no
by other ties, and had an interest which sve„
ignore in affording her assistance ; while t';,,,`"st all
tion of the British Isles, sheltering them aga-so to
reprisals, the danger of such a struggle Was' Of'
speak, for England.nothing. We, on the 0.4° ionea
had no interest to embrace the cause proP.T;,' Get'
to the considerable sacrifices which a war ww, gay
many would have imposed, and, therefore!n•ttia;
England only a diplomatic help." " tneA-ei and
tion changed ? Should we modify our attitg-,,,1-'
take arms to preserve to the Crown of Peil-etter,
25,000 to 30,000 souls more in Schleswig ? anted
to have made war for the treaty which guar-ritiol°
the integrity of the Danish monarchy. A inaa
demonstration would mean for us war by rifice
could not localise hostilities or limit our s:rose
we must employ all our resources. In the rod
of an eventuality of this nature would Eli.lgrotlYn
disposed to give us unlimited support ?"
de Lhuys then remarks that Lord Russell 5e t ad
think that a maritime demonstration wouldlifi°oo t°
to a conflict, and that it Would suffice to o'o4
bring Germany to reason, and points out the 0 1,01
of such an expectation, concluding with theSggit 06
significant words, " Before the regretable rta
Pola'scheck,
our common action in the affair of
authority of the two powers had suffered but 00,1
they could employ it without hesitation ,to thenA
words not followed by action would be fats' ale'
dignity." The French Minister, thereforel,soo
ultw-ev or
that Germany would have answered
with defiance, and that war would have /011.°,1,ci to s
that France and England must have subiniit',,Wen;
humiliation destructive of the prestige ancliireli tli°
and he could not, after the way in weoa the
English Minister had left him in the lure' eal'''.
Polish question, feel confident that Frances,,u, or
by 101;00'
not be left to vindicate her dignity
compelled to eat the leek. The blundering, t1,1,„$ the
ful conduct of Earl Russell in 1863 was tu„ slls'
cause of the disaster which English diploruac„Jr
tained in 1864. Upon that question how e' love
will not now enlarge. It is enough 'that we,,i,a3
shown from this dispatch of M. Drouyn de
that this peace-loving English 'Minister, this go
statesman, who has saved, as hetells us, his coniiiejj
from a tremendous war on behalf of a state els
had no claims to its aid, endeavoured so latei7 for
month of June to get up a general war, and
the comparatively petty question whether Sl o• hs
should be divided by a line drawn by the Seidel de•
ro.
Dannewerke, or beyond from Flensberg torro°,oo.
We are judging Earl Russell by his 01111 profe_'croilo
We do not say that England should not havc, f,avo
to war last June, much less that she should nosbe'tho
gone to war in January. We onlY elcPconrii4
arrant fraud which the Government is endea I„iia
kept Eng co
to commit in taking credit for having 4--ons Ave
acera
out of war, when its most strenuous extend the v
employed to involve her war, and to
over the whole of Europe.