The Sun.
London, England, 1865-03-07 00:00:00

!raven

WAGES IN DOCKYARDS.

much greater power than the Edgar, has a complement
of 720 men and an officer to every 12 men. Take again
one of our large corvettes, having a complement of 275
men ; they have an officer to every nine men. But the little
ironclad Enterprise, which would blow any of them out of
the water, while she has only a complement of 119 men,
has an officer to every seven men. These figures show
that the tendency of modern changes is to reduce our

complements, but to increase the number of officers. There
is another and a very important reason why the increase

of so many officers is proposed during the coming year.
The fact is, we have found it necessary, in the absence of a

proper supply of artificers, to provide a large increase of

engineers, who are themselves excellent workmen andable
to repair our engines. With regard to the coastguard on

shore, we propose a reduction of 500 men. Though admi-

rably efficient, it is a very costly force, and we thought it
was our bounden duty to make inquiries of the Commis-

sioners of Customs whether the force was required for the
protection of the revenue. They had made a prelimi-
nary report to the effect that some reduction of that
force, might be made as far as the interests of the

revenue were concerned. As to the coastguard afloat,
every one knows the origin of this force ; there was

a time when we had no reserves, and when alarm existed on
the part of the country for the proper defence of our shores.

Hence it arose that this force of 11 ships was attached to
various ports. The services which they have performed are
inestimable. They have broken down the barrier which
used to exist between the navy and the merchant service,
and have provided men for our fleet. They have, in fact,

been, I may say, one of the main causes of the great
success of our Royal naval reserve. Having fulfilled that
duty, there is no longer the necessity to keep up so large
a force, since we possess that magnificent reserve of nearly
17,000 now enrolled. We propose, therefore, to make a

small and gradual reduction in the force—not to an ex

tent to impair its efficiency, but such as we think is due
to the circumstances of the present day. There is an-

other reason why we may now somewhat reduce that force,
and that is, we are looking forward to be enabled to replace
those useless line-of-battle ships by armour-plated ships ;

and the moment we can carry that out, the crews will
necessarily be reduced in numbers. With regard to the
marines, we propose to reduce them by 1,000 men. This is
also a consequence of the reduction of the complements of
our new ships of war. The real value of a marine depends

on the amount of sea service which he goes through. If
you have more marines than can go through their tour of
sea duty, they lose all the characteristics of the sailor. We
may now safely reduce the force by 1,000 men, and still

keep it up in its integrity, and allow all to take their proper
tour of sea duty. With regard to boys, we propose to

- -
maintain the same number. The reason why we are in-

creasing our votes while we are reducing our numbers is

clue to several causes. First of all, we are happily improv-

ing the position and improving the conduct of our sailors

and marines, and consequently we are obliged to pay a
much larger sum for good-conduct pay. In 1859, when we
had many more thousands of men than we have now, we
took £25,900 for good-conduct pay to the marines ; but in
the year 1865-66 we take £52,628 for the same service.
(Hear, hear.) Another reason is, that while in 1861 we had

one man out of every seven belonging to the gunnery class
receiving additional pay for having become expert gun-
ners, in the year 1864 we had one man in three. That

is another source of increase. There was another cause

of small additional expense, viz., the high price of
butchers' meat. It is true that, on the other hand, the
cost of all farinaceous food is less than last year, but the
difference of the two items still left a balance on the
side of additional expenditure. Another source of in-
crease in the estimates was the additions which had from
time to time been made in the full pay of nearly every
class in the navy. The house had granted in six years an
increase in the full pay of officers, seamen, and marines,
to the amount of £26B,736—that is to say, the same
number of men would now cost the country £268,736
more than six years ago. In 1859_a seaman cost £64 ss. 7d.

with all collateral expenses ; but in the year 1865 he
costs £74 ss. 3d. A marine in 1859 cost £5B 12s. sp.,
but in 1865 he costs £6l2s. 3jd. Let me advert to a subject
of very great importance to the welfare of our navy—viz.,
the system adopted for replenishing the navy with boys
brought up and educated in the service, and becoming in
due time the best seamen in the navy. In the year 1863-4
the average number of blue jackets, excluding every class
but the fine fellow who goes aloft to the yard arm and reefs
the topsails, but including blue jacket petty officers, was
24,500. In that same year, the discharges from all causes,
including deaths and desertions, amounted to 310. During
the year the number of boys was 2,517, leaving, therefore,
about 600 men to be entered from the merchant service ;

and I find that there were actually entered that year of
seamen from the shore, 594. That makes up the whole
waste in the men. That number of 2,517 boys who were
rated came from a stock of 9,000 boys. Last year I proposed
a reduction from 9,000 to 7,000 boys, and I remember that
my right hon. friend (Sir J. Pakington) expressed some
alarm lest that should be insufficient. We reduced the num-
ber of boys by 2,000; but, instead of entering them at a
tender age, we have increased the ago for entering, and
given the whole of that time for instruction in seamen's
duties. Before that alteration boys were entered, and many
of them became officers' servants, and they cost a great deal
of time, and did not get through their instruction so quick
as they do now. We find they learn their seaman's duties
quicker, and are able to pass up sooner into the fleet. We
propose that every boy coming into the navy shall pass
through the training-ship, and that there shall 'be none,
with a very few exceptions, who have not gone through the

preliminary instruction. We expect that, having now 3,00
boys in training-shipe, being an increase of 500, to rate up to
seamen about 2,000 annually. That is a considerable reduc-
tion, but, on the other hand, the right hon. baronet and other
hon. members must be reminded that we are looking forward
to a small but gradual reduction in the number of seamen
in consequence of the number of armour ships and ships
with smaller complements. We are substituting skilled
labour for what I may almost call brute force. Every
year we are increasing the number of gunnery classes, and
what we are losing in numbers we are gaining in skilled
labour. We expect this 2,000 will be sufficient, because I
shall be able to show that there is less waste, as desertions
are increasing, and the men are becoming more and more
attached to the service. The increase in our training-ships
has led to an increase in the cost of the boys ; and I find
that, whilst boys in the current year cost £45 2s. per head,
the cost for 1865-6 will be £lB 18s., being an increase of £4
per head. I come now to the scientific vote. There is a new
item in this vote which I think will be approved by the
committee. The education going on in the navy and dock-
yards under the Admiralty has absolutely necessitated the
appointment of an officer as Director of Education, and,
therefore, with the consent of the Treasury, we have ap-
pointed a well-known gentleman, who has been for many
years connected with the Admiralty, to that office, at a
salary of £964. We take a considerably larger sum for the
school of naval architecture, which I may say is working
admirably. We hear the best accounts of the progress of
the pupils, and that some of them aro coming in from the
private trade. I shall be happy to give more information
if required, but I am boundto say that my estimate for the
current year were not sufficiently high, and were exceeded
by the small excess of £2,200. The next vote is that for
superintendents of dockyards. There is no change in that
vote, nor need I make any remarks upon it further than to
state that in a few days there will be a new proposal laid
upon the table as to the form of taking these votes. It is pro-
posed, instead- of spreading the cost of the personnel of the
dockyard and expenditure as at present, to put them all
together in one vote. The same with regard to the victual-
ling establishment ; so that in this manner the house will
be able to see clearly what the whole cost of our dockyards
is. We are endeavouring to carry out the recommendations
of the committee of 1861 as to dockyards, and we are
anxious to lay on the table full accounts, showing the
expenses of building, repairing, and maintaining our
ships, and likewise the expenses of manufactured articles
which are made in the dockyards. This year we propose
to go a step further, and to lay on the table of the house
a general balance-sheet, showing the value of the naval
stores at the commencement of the year, the operations
during the year, and the balance at the end of the year. I
may say that I for one shall not be satisfied until wo aro
enabled to laq upon the table of this house annually a
regular debtor and creditor account, not only as regards the
dockyards and ships, but also with respect to everything
connected with the expenditure of the navy. (Hear, hear.)
I can assure my hon. and learned friend the member for
Lincoln that the taunt of supineness on my part since I
have been in office, and of forgetting the earnest desire I
expressed when out of office that these accounts should be
shown, is unmerited. Personally I should not have thought
it necessary to answer such accusations, but they have
given pain to many able men in the department to which
I belong; and I think it was hardly generous, considering
the progress that has been made, that we should be taunted
with supineness in this matter. I believe in a short time
we shall be able to place on the table the papers to which
I have alluded ; but it will be well to guard against undue
hoffooaperrstrattehi,e iifsoonrsse.ry accounts unless they are really correct are worse
than valueless. I now approach the great shipbuilding
operations. First,
ee dockyard.i s Th there theeaimso£2,93o,6s4. un
amount
Fo
r labourow
atask
ke andfor
present
thea l s oyyeare thear storeslBt there
r-6e
h a weas vdoetcerdeafseer
itnhisshseiprvhuiicledilg,
£3,390,833. Therefore there will
&c., of £460,179, rather less
than one-fourth being actually due to shipbuilding in the
present and likewise in the coming year. For the first
time I have laid on the table of the house a very interest-
ing paper, being a complete programme of works for the
coming year, which my noble friend the Duke of Somerset
was anxious should be laid before the house. For the in-
formati6n of the public, therefore, I may state that in the
year 1865-6 we propose to construct 15,115 tons of ship-
ping ; whilst in the current financial year we expect to have
constructed 18,952, being a decrease of tonnage propor-
tionate to the decrease in ourestimates. We have altogether
30 complete or in the process of construction ; and I may
state with some satisfaction that the whole of them, with
one exception, will be completed and ready for sea, if
necessary, by the close of the present calendar year. The
must state
isinapluabrguoe
isthiips canolltedoretdhietabNloortthoumthb:r
mlaniud. I
Shipbuilding Company that this ship has not been com-
pleted with others, her sister ships, which were
while ordered at
bereadayll
athboeuotththeor
shipsthe
orderedt i time
abouto at
the
eo tshaemr
efirt time e will

Mr. FERRAND called attention to the great inequality
of wages Fad in the royal and private dockyards, and con-
tended at some length that the employes in the former re-
ceived on an average 2s. per day less than the men in pri-
vate establishments. This, ha argued, was grossly unfair,
and was not compensated for by the superannuation allow-
ances, as not more than three per cent. of the royal arti-
ficers ever lived to get any allowance at all, and even these
did not survi7e more than from three to five years. All
that the men asked was an increase of 6d. per day.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE supported the motion.
Mr. CHILDERS, in opposing the motion, said that Mr.
Ferrand had been misinformed as to his statistics, and that
the increased wages which he asked in behalf of 16,000
dockyard men would entail a charge upon the country equi-
valent to £150,000 per annum. The position of the men in
the royal dockards had been much improved of late, and
the per-centage of men entitled to superannuation allow-
ances was much greater than that stated by Mr. Ferrand.
The subject then dropped, and the house went into
committee of supply.
NAVY ESTIMATES.

Lord C. PAGET—In rising to move the consideration o
the navy estimates for the year 1865-6, I find, Sir, that in
addition to the many interesting topics upon which this
house and the public are naturally and properly desirous of
receiving every information, and which information I am
always most anxious to give—l find that on the present
occasion I have another duty to perform, viz., to make some
novel propositions on the construction of docks and basins
for the United Kingdom, and also for the colonies. I must
therefore ask the indulgence of the committee. With re-
gard to the naval estimates for the present year, 1865-6,
there isvery little change in them. There are some items
which are transferred from one vote to another, as being
more properly placed, but in each case hon. gentlemen who
consult the estimates will find reasons given for those
changes, and also an explanatory statement attached to the
votes, giving accounts of the number of officers and men,
and the full pay of each class, both of officers and men. Her
Majesty's Government propose that the naval estimates for
the year 1865-6 shall be £10,393,321. The estimates for the
current year include two supplementary estimates, which I
brought in at the latter end of last session ; one being
£220,000 for the purchase of two rams at Liverpool, the
other a sum of £61,000 odd for additional pay of officers
and petty officers of the fleet—making a gross total of
£10,708,651. Therefore there is a decrease of the gross esti-
mates of the present year of £316,427; but excluding tho
purchase of those rams, which may be said to have been an
ztraordinaryservic,e, the estimates of the past year, includ-
g the additional pay which the house in its generosity
for nine moanatdh
insteadtsa, kthinegdtehuaretapsasyoffotrhteheeswtihmaolteesyefoarr
grantedotfo the
navy,
the coming year over the ordinary estimates of last year
would be £116,000. I propose first of all to deal with certain
votesmsmedical
lhuiucmh
fhuartvseurfeufffierueenrces,steoapmacyn,,allnlodinwances, victuals, and
rinesri
hThese vari-
ous services are comprised in votes 1,2,
and n
e thatviovteetsh for
rthe coming year are remarkable in this respect,
show an increase over the current year, although
pro-
pose that they should bear a less number of persons. This
is a circumstance which I will explain to the committee.is
But I must first deal with the numbers. The numbers voted
for the current year were 71,950 men ; thoso for 1865-6 aro
only 69,750, being a decrease of 2,200. The decrease is
thus made up : The decrease of the seamen of the fleet is
about 700 men. There will be a decrease of officers and
seamen of the coastguard of 500 men. There will be a
decrease of marines on shore of 1,000 men. There will be
a decrease of civilians of 200 men. Of the latter I will only
say that they are aged persons in the Customs, who are
being superannuated and disappearing, their places being
insu pmpeline,dwbey
hthave btguecothaeanaormda:louWa hfailcstt
o-w have
fe
an inctrhieassedeocfre
offi-
cers. I propose to show the committee why we think it
mrigallt teos.prorhoseseandoenc.rmeaesme
beinrathwe
hnoummabyer
feoefl
seamen
alarmed
t
this proposal—and I see my hon. friend the member for
Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck) seems alreadyft‘ornewhat alarmed at
my statement—l would refer to page 116 of the estimates,
where they will observe the number of ships we had in
commission on Dec. 1 last, and the number in commission
on Dec. lof the previous year. They will find that of sea-
going ships in commission there is a decrease of six ; but
there are four more armour-plated in commission, and
therefore I am entitled to say that, though the numbers are
decreased, we aro in fact increasing our force. We find that
as we go on commissioning armour-plated ships, and sub-
stituting them for line-of-battle ships, we decrease the
numberAsanof seamen, but increase the proportion of officers.
illustration of this, I will refer to the complements
of seme of the ships now in commission. The Edgar, avert'
fineline-of-battle ship, the flagship of the. Channelsqu%dron,
has a complement of 810 men, and a proportion of one
officer to 15 men ; but the Black Prince, which is of very

THE SUIN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 7, 1865

end of this year, there is little prospect of that ship being
ready till the autumn of next year. I should feel more
uncomfortable about this if it did not appear that during
the last few months we have reason for being better satis-

fled with the progress of the ship than before. Every one
of these ships has been described by me at various times,
with the exception of two. Of these the Royal Alfred is

one of the five line-of-battle ships which it was decided to

armour-plate. She was the most backward of all, and ac-
cordingly we find that some alterations have been made in
that ship without any great cost, which caused great im-
provements, both as a sea-going ship and also in regard
to her defensive qualities. Those that are armour-plated
throughout have a considerable tendency to pitch, and it is
therefore desirable as far as possible to lighten their ends.

Accordingly, instead of plating this ship all round with 41
inch plates, we are reducing the area of the armour-plate
fore and aft, and almost to the water-line, and increasing
the plates from 44 to 6 inches in thickness. This will in-
crease the cost of the armour-plates by about £15,000,
besides additional dockyard works. The only other vessel
I have the honour to describe to the House is a small one

of very peculiar construction. It is upon a principle which
may be described as propelling by volumes of water thrown
out by means of a powerful water-wheel within the ship—
in fact, propelling the ship by the action of water against
water. If successful, it will have great properties for turn-
ing the ship round, as it were, upon a pivot. Whether we

shall be able to attain the same speed as with vessels of the

ordinary construction lam not prepared to say. We were
disposed to give it a trial, and accordingly the Waterwitch

was the vessel selected.
Sir J. PAKINGTON—Is it a screw ?
Lord C. PAGET—No, it is not a screw. It is propelled
by a jet of water thrown out from the side of the ship. Our
armour fleet may be classified as follows:—We have seven
ships of a very great speed, but with a very great draught
of water, and therefore they cannot be docked out of this
country. These form our first squadron.
Sir J. PAKINGT ON—Does that include the Defence and
the Resistance ?

Lord C. PAGET—No ; I had better read the list. Our
first squadron consists of the Warrior, the Black Prince, the
Achilles, the Minotaur, the Agincourt, the Northumber-
land, and the Bellerophon. These are vessels of great speed
and great length. The second squadron consists of the Lord
Clyde, the Royal Oak, the Prince Consort, the Ocean, the
Caledonian, the Royal Alfred, and the Lord Warden. These
are less ships, and are of smaller speed. The third squad-
ron contains the Zealous, the Hector, the Valiant, the De-

fence, and the Resistance, making altogether 19 ships of the

line. The next class are the frigates, corvettes, and gun -
boats—the Favourite, the Research, the Enterprise, the
Pallas, the Frequent, the Vixen, and the Waterwitch. We
now come to the four ships that will be serviceable for
coast defences—the Royal Sovereign, the Prince Albert, the
Scorpion, and the Weasel. I will not enter at present into
the question of turret versus ironside, because I think it
will be better to discuss that when the vote is taken. My
object is to show what we propose to do in shipbuilding
during the coming year. I have named the Bellerophon,
the Lord Warden, the Lord Clyde, and the Pallas. lam
now bound in justice to the dockyard establishment to state
to the committee one fact. They will remember that this
time last year I described these ships as being just laiddown.
I am now able to state that these ships have all been built
in the course of the present year. It is satisfactory, there-
fore, to know that, instead of occupying three or four years
in construction, when the:mode of shipbuilding might change,
we are able to complete such vessels in twelve months. We
propose as soon as the Bellerophon is out of the dockyard at
Chatham to build with some points of difference a sister
ship, which will, I think, strike the house with what we
are coming to in the way of the defensive plating of ships.
The thickness of the. Warrior's united skins is this—she is
51 of iron, and 18 inches of wood, being a total of 231
inches. That is the thickness of the Warrior. The Her-
cules, which is to succeed the Bellerophon, will have a
thickness of 9 inches iron with 10 inches of wooden back-

be removed.

ing, 11- inner iron skin, 22 inches of wood inside that, and
then of an inch of inner skin of iron. In other respects
she will be similar to the Bellerophon. As regards her
armaments, I can only say she will be armed with the
newest kind of guns. In the next place, we propose to
build an armour-plated ship at Pembroke, which will differ
from the construction recommended by the committee. We
propose to build an armour-plated low-decked corvette ;
she will be a vessel of 3,000 tons, with a draught of water
of only 16 feet, with thin screws. We propose to give her
at the water-line 6 inches of iron and 10 inches of wood,
with an inner skin of I inches of iron. Therefore, she will
not be so well protected as a heavier ship, but still she will
be a very powerful vessel, and we hope that she will be
able to carry eight of those large guns. Our further ope-
rations in the dockyards will be to commence the building
of four swift ships, not armour-plated, but trusting en-
tirely to their speed and their armament--vessels after the
pattern of the famous Alabama, only of an improved form.
Three of these aro now under construction, and we pro-
pose in the present year to commence four more. These
vessels are entirely for the protection of our commerce,
and they will be constructed of wood. In addition to this,
there is a sum of £120,000 included in the votes, part of a
sum of £240,000 on account of ships to be built by con-
tract. This is for the construction of one or more ships.
The first proposal I have to make is, that we should en-
deavour, if possible, to construct ships upon Capt. Coles's
principle with real sea-going capabilities. Hitherto we
have not succeeded in constructing a thoroughly sea-going
vessel of that kind ; and I cannot deny that Captain
Coles will have considerable difficulties to overcome in
constructing such a ship upon the turret principle. Every
one knows that a sea-going ship must have masts and
rigging ; on the other hand, the turret must be in the
centre of the ship, and in order to secure a clear range
for the guns there ought to be no obstruction at either
extremity. However, lam confident that Capt. Coles will
be able to overcome the difficulty. He has been directed by
the Admiraltyg prepare plans, and every assistance has
been
proposed is that, when the de-
vei t e him. to
What
is
de-
signs are approved of, the Admiralty shall invite tenders
for their construction by contract. We are also desirous of
constructing small armour-plated ships for the defence of
our harbours upon the turret Principle. He entered very
fully into Vote 11, for new works, buildings, machinery
and repairs, specifying in what manner the Government
proposed to deal with the recommendations Of the com-
mittee of last year. The amount of this vote was £527,985,
showing a real increase over that of last year of £30,000,
the nominal increase, including transfer from other votes,
being £53,000. He explained the intentions of the 'Go-
vernment regarding the vote for the Malta Docks, conse-
quent upon the visit of the Duke of Somerset, and the ex-
penditure fora dock at the French Creek. In conclusion,
ho took notice of reports that the navy was unpopular ; that
therewasa
continuous-servicemen,
in manning the navy, and especially
in obtaining and stated facts which
negatived these reports, and showed that men were attached
to the service. He read returns of the crimes and punish-
ments of the navy (which he proposed to lay annually on
the table), showing their diminution and the moral im-
provement of the service.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that, although the noble lord
had gone into considerable details in his long statement
he had not removed the desire which he had expressed to
the noble lord on a former occasion for certain explana-
tions with regard to the actual condition of the navy. The
noble lord had boasted that not even the shortcomings of
his department had been concealed, and he hoped that
would prove to be the case. But in the meantime there
were one or two statements made by the noble lord
which demanded immediate notice. He wished, in the
first place, to refer to the proposed reduction in the coast-
guard service ; and, considering that the coastguard ser-
vice was the first reserve, he could not but think the reduc-
tion of 500 men was a very imprudent step. The noble lord
also boasted of the state of the men in the navy ; but he
could not deny that the best source from which they/could
recruit the navy was from the boys who were trained for
the service, and he therefore regretted there was a reduc-
tion in the number of boys. There was another important
question with reference to the manning of the navy, to
which he wished to direct attention. What at that moment
was the state of the reserves of the navy? The noble lord
told them that, after manning the Victoria, they had 700
men on hand as an available reserve to man another ship of
equal size. The noble lord also said that there were in the
several ports 1,500 men and boys. [Lord C. PAGET—SO we
have now.] He was very glad to hear it, the morn so as the
statement was inconsistent with theinformation he had re-
ceived; and if the fact were so, he was surprised that the
noble lord should have passed over a fact of so much im-
portance.
Lord C. PAGET explained that he had unintentionally
misrepresented the matter. The fact was that they had
1,225 men, exclusive of boys, making in the aggregate
about 1,500 men and boys.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said he would now turn to a sub-
ject of extreme importance, viz., the construction of docks,
with reference to which he sincerely congratulated the Ad-
miralty on the wisdom of the decision at which they had
arrived respecting the Malta dock; and he thought great
credit was due to the Duke of Somerset for having taken
the trouble to visit Malta to judge of the case for himself.
It was satisfactory to them on the Opposition side that
what they had all along recommended was to be carried into
effect. (Hear, hear.) Withreference to the dock at Bermuda,
it was impossible to shut their eyes to contingencies that
might arise; and in view of such contingencies no censure
would be too strong for any Government which neglected
the proper precautions for meeting them. It had been stated
by the committee who had inquired into the subject that it
was essential to construct a dock at Bermuda or Halifax.
The noble lord said there were practical difficulties in the
way of constructing _a dock at Bermuda. But how did the
Admiralty propose to overcome those difficulties ? The
noble lord told them the Admiralty were to send somebody
out to inquire. But why had not that somebody been sent
out months ago ? His hon. friend the member for Stafford
had asked a very pertinent question of the noble lord,
namely, when it was intended to carry out those works
He trusted that in future years they would see larger votes
of money asked for those purposes, and, as those works
were to be undertaken, that they would be carried out with
promptness and spirit, instead of being extended over a
number of years. He now came to a most important ques-
tion : whether the condition of the navy was not at that
moment such that the country could not' enter into a mari-
time war. He approached the question of the national de-

fences in no party spirit, as he was sure that the members of
the Government were as sincerely desirous of rendering
them efficient as any member on his own side of the house.

But the real question was -whether the Government had
exercised due caution and discretion, and availed them-
selves of the means at their disposal, and to the extent
which it was the imperative duty of every Government to
do. He would not be acting fairly towards the noble lord
if, from what he had heard, he did not declare to him that
he was not free from alarm. During the last five years the
Admiralty had not availed themselves of the liberal grants
which Parliament had placed at their disposal, so as to be
in a condition at that moment to state that they had done

all they could have done within the period to which he had

referred. He had on a former occasion expressed his
doubts to the noble lord, and asked him for certain explana-
tions, and the noble lord preferred that he should postpone
his questions until he had made his statement. The total
amount of the navy estimates for the last five years, and

which the House of Commons had voted almost with-

out question, was £57,794,622. Was it true, as he

heard rumoured on all sides, that notwithstanding this
enormous sum, if England was involved in a maritime
war, she could not send an effective fleet to sea? (Hear,

hear.) He knew the gravity of the statement, and no
one would rejoice more than himself if the doubt could

He was aware that they were passing

through a period of transition in naval affairs, and there-
fore he thought the Admiralty should not have hesitated to

try any experiments which promised to give increased effi-
ciency to the navy. The first point upon which he wished
for explanation was with reference to the two ships con-
structed by the present Admiralty, the Defence and the
Resistance. One of the first requisites in a man-of-war was

speed. The Defence and the Resistance were slow ships,
and, until lately, he believed want of speed to be their only
defect ; but he was now informed that the construction of
those ships was so defective that if they were wounded in

their unprotected parts, either fore or aft, instead of being
immersed so many inches deeper, they would be unable to

float. He wished to have an answer to that question. He
was told that those vessels had been built in opposition to the
advice of the Chief Constructor of the navy—of the Comp-
troller. Was that the truth or not ? The large unfinished
ships,the Northumberland, the Agincourt, and the Minotaur,
were plated all round. He had always doubted the wisdom
of plating armour ships from stem to stern. The Admiralty
had been warned of the danger, and now, after these ships
had cost enormous sums of money, they, finding out their
error, were proceeding to incur further expense by taking
that armour off. A still more serious matter was the case
of the ships of the Caledonia class. This class of vessels
involved ten men-of-war, which had cost an enormous sum
of money. They were the Caledonia, the Royal Oak, the
Prince Consort, the Lord Clyde, the Lord Warden, the
Royal Alfred, the Zealous, the Hector, and the Valiant.
All of these but the Hector and the Valiant were wooden
ships, plated from stem to stern. Only two wooden ships,
the Royal Oak and the Prince Consort, and the two iron
ships, the Hector and the Valiant, had ever been in com-
mission. On the subject of those ships Admiral Dacres
had presented a report to the Admiralty. The Admiralty
had been asked to produce that report, and the noble
lord had declined to do so, on the ground that it was
contrary to all precedent. He (Sir J. Pakington) and
the public were afraid that the objection to producing
that report was because Admiral Dacres had stated that
those ships were not fit to go to sea. The fact was that, in
spite of the experience afforded by the French navy, and
of the warnings they had received, the Admiralty had gone
on in the most erroneous course of building these wooden
ships, and plating them with iron from stem to stern. He
had heard it stated that when Admiral Dacres went to sea
with the Channel fleet, he was warned not to take those
vessels out in heavy weather, because they had been con-
structed so inefficiently that they were not fit to go to sea.
He (Sir J. Pakington) believed that none of them would be
able to weather a gale of wind in the Atlantic ; in proof of
which ho would cite the case of the Prince Consort, which
had nearly foundered last year in the Irish Channel. The
Government had now taken the alarm, so that the Royal
Alfred and the Zealous were now only to be partially
plated. The Admiralty were now in this painful dilemma,
that if they plated ships all round they were not fit to go
to sea, and if they were only partially plated they were not
fit to go into action. The Royal Alfred, when fit be put
into commission, would be a burlesque upon a first-class
iron-plated ship. The Admiralty had not given Captain
Coles's invention of the turret mode of arming our ships a
fair trial. It was not creditable to the Admiralty that they
should have remained for the noble lord to come down that
day and say that they were now intending to build a sea-
going ship on the turret principle. If they intended to try
the principle, why did they not begin long ago ? (Hear.)
He complained that the Royal Sovereign was not a proper
ship for the trial of the invention of Captain Coles ; but at
the same time he would like to know why the Royal Sove-
reign had since been put out of commission. Suspicions
widely and generally entertained that there was a secret
influence at the Admiralty opposed to the trial of the turret
principle, and that finding the experiments were successful
they paid off the crew—a crew that would not so easily be
got together again. He was afraid that the most competent
and scientific men in the difficult art of shipbuilding had
been gradually expelled the Admiralty. He alluded to
Mr. Watts, the late thief constructor—than whom a more
competent man never held office—Mr. Peak, Mr. Oliver
Lang, and Mr. Bothell, not one of whom was at the
Admiralty now. They were succeeded by Mr. Reed, a
clever man, who might have acquired great distinction if
he had been dealt with in a proper manner, but to whom
and to the country the Admiralty had acted with great in-
justice and indiscretion by placing him in his present
position. His first works were the Enterprise and the
Research. The former was reported to be a good sea-boat
but so imperfectly clad in iron, and in some respects on so
mistaken a principle, that if she went into action she would
be destroyed directly. As to the Research, the ship by
which Mr. Reed wished to be judged, he believed her cap-
tain, though a brave sailor, was glad when on a trip from
Plymouth to Portsmouth he arrived safe in port. In fact,
he had heard the Research was not safe as a sea-going
boat, and that it was difficult to get a ship's crew to go to
sea in her. He believed the Research was as great a failure
as over was launched. He did not say Mr. Reed might not
build a good ship ; but this he did say, that in the present
state of his experience the Admiralty was trifling with the
interests of England if they allowed him to do any more.
When they wanted to send a fleet across the Atlantic, he
advised them to go to such men as Mr. Watts and Mr.
Lang, and not to trust to a man, whatever his ability, whose
first effort was a vessel in which he would challenge the
Government to dare to send any man to sea in heavy
weather. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. ELPHINST ONE strongly condemned an Admi-
ralty which, having received a larger sum of money than
any that bad been granted in modern times, had squandered
it on vessels which it was notorious to any sea-faring man
were not capable of keeping the sea. The School of Naval
Architecture had been dispersed, and many able gentlemen
forced out, and they had got the navy into the hands of a
man whose first production was an abortion. The Admi-
miralty had taken care not to produce Admiral Dacres's
report, because he believed that report would damn them
and their policy. (Hear, hoar.) There was, however, the
concurrent testimony of officers and men, that with the
exception of the Warrior, the Black Prince, the Defence,
and the Resistance, none of the iron-clad fleet were
sea-worthy. He also complained of the discouragement
given to Capt. Coles and the turret principle. The noble
lord told them that the Admiralty had resolved upon the
construction of a class of fast wooden cruisers for the pro-
tection of our commerce. Well, he would not assert that
they could get rid of wood entirely, but he admitted that
since the burning of the Bombay his ideas respecting the
relative merits of wood and iron had been very much modi-
fied. It was quite certain there was not the same chance
of fire on board an iron vessel. At the same time, all these
ships ought to be fitted out upon the cupola principle. In
the next place, he must express his regret that the repair-
ing and up-keeping of our ships seemed to bo entirely
neglected. The fact was, there was a great want of
sagacity in the Comptroller's office. He earnestly hoped
the Government would not carry out the proposal to do
away with the small dockyards. At Portsmouth they were
only going to expend £30,000 this year, when they might
easily spend £500,000 if the works were quickly approved
of. There was to be no expenditure at all at Halifax, and
yet Halifax was perhaps the most important point they
ought to be at work at. There was a creek there in which
a most efficient dockyard might be constructed. He con-
gratulated the department upon the determination to make
the French Creek the site of the new dock at Malta. His
next complaint was that seamen were discharged into hulks
instead of being housed in barracks. And then he had to
complain that the pay officers in the navy had not been as
yet properly adjusted, and that they were not dealt with,
either as regarded their pay or their periods of leave of
absence, on the same liberal principle as officers of the
army. He likewise advocated the establishment of a Naval
College, which should be open to both the Royal and mer-
cantile marines. The noble lord had created a new class
of warrant officers who were called chief warrant officers ;
but it was very strange that, out of 1,200 warrant officers,
only 55 had been promoted to the higher class, and he could
not at all understand on what principle they had been
selected. Atter remarking that the men in the naval reserve
were not properly drilled, the hon. member concluded by
saying that ho would defer his other observations until the
various votes came before the house.
Mr. SEELY took occasion to justify the statement he
had made on a previous night, that certain ships had been
repaired at too great an expense, as well as his remarks on
the cost of converting timber, and on the dockyard ac-
counts, which, he contended, had been drawn up in a form
that defeated Parliamentary control.
Sir W. MILES said a great catalogue of grievances bad
been brought before the house ; but one had not been ad-
verted to which he hoped would be considered by the Ad-
miralty—namely, the exclusion of widows of engineers
from pension.
On the motion of Sir M. PETO, the Chairman was ordered
to report progress.
The Common Law Courts (Fees) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Mr. M. GIBSON obtained leave to bring in a bill to
amend the Law of Partnership:
The house adjourned at a quarter-past 12 o'clock.