The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-01 00:00:00

GUN BOATS FOR THE BALTIC.

No less than three allusions, to this important
' subject appeared in the published correspondence
in the morning papers of Monday and Tuesday,
and on Wednesday the Times, under the head of
" Cronstadt not impregnable," gives an extract
from a letter, dated May 15, from which we extract
the following :—" Again wo must wait till gun-
boats arrive from England. These must be of very
light draught of water." . . " There are cer-
tainly two or three redoubts which must be
bombarded by gun-boats, and carried at the point
of the bayonet. The only difficulty that I. appre-
hend is, that the Admiralty will send us gun-boats
totally unfitted for the service, as they ought not
to draw more than six feet of water, and
should be built of sufficient scantling to bear
the concussion of heavy artillery." Our omnipo-
tent contemporary, the Times, publishes these
remarks with no other comment than " they are
not without interest," and in a former article—a
leader—did a few weeks ago complain of the sudden
war having found us, among other deficiencies,
"unprepared with efficient gun vessels." That can
hardly be called vigorously rousing the authorities
to a sense of what is due to our gallant soldiers and
sailors who peril their lives while we " sit at
home at ease."

Our contemporary did, however, give insertion
to the letters of Mr. Russell and Capt. Claxton,
and so far did much good service to a cause which
otherjournals besides ourselves have spoken out
upon. The extract we give to-day comes from a
high hand, and the remarks are singularly con-
sistent with what we have described as the real want
of the war—gun-boats of large armament, good
power, and light draught of water, instead of gun
vessels of the Pigmy, Otter, and Jasper class, all of
which draw over 10 feet, or of the new class build-
ing, all of which will draw 13 feet ! I !---•the light
draught of our war steamers already in the Bailie!!!
We promised to keep our eye on this matter.
We are doing so still. We have heard it much
discussed by naval officers, and some of them of high
standing, and we may say with only one point of
difference, to wit., that this season it was too late to
get them out after it was known Sir Charles Na-
pier had asked for them, a fact that even Sir James
Graham will not deny. We think differently. We
have shown that six or eight weeks ago, if ordered,
they might have been far advanced, and that
builders would have subjected themselves to heavy
penalties if they had not been ready for delivery
from that time in three months, or from the time
we write in four or five weeks. We do not stop to
be particular to a day; that is about the time—and
if contracted for the month of July, and early in it
too, they might have been in action in the Baltic.
We hear that an eminent builder is about to
build one as a sample, and we hope and trust, if
she turns out what we think she will, a sense of
shame will do more for the service than has yet
been accomplished in this particular by our poor
efforts, or by the sensible remarks of some of our
weekly contemporaries. We hope we shall not by
and bye have to detail misfortunes, or at any rate an
ineffective accomplishment of grand designs for the
want of vessels such as have been described, and
such as are now, (as appears by the letter published)
being anxiously—and, oh, how disappointingly—
looked for in the Baltic.