The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-17 00:00:00

not allow a ship to be constantly stationed nt Cali
fornia. There would be abandat.t opportunities of going
into the other details, and all he asked at present Iva:
that the House would carefully c,nsicier before they
followed the motion of the Hon. Member. lie had net
himself been brought up in the school of extravagance,
and he trusted that after the large reductions which the
Government had already proposed to make, the House
Would pause before they forced Government to reduce
the amount of men below that which was proposed b)
the vote, and which they believed was necessary to the
real service of the country.
Mr. WODE 110 USE said that the Hon. Member for
Montrose had brought an accusation against the count)
Gentlemen, that they would not support him. Their
reason for not having done so was, that he never would
carry his view with respect to lthe reduction of the
establishment with a due regard to the circumstances
in which the country was placed, and he (Mr. Wode-
house) would endeavour to show this by a retrospec
of his conduct. He would begin with the year 1812.
That year was a year of danger; there was no
internal tranquillity in any part of the king-
dom. There were insurrections in every part of the
kingdom—amongst them the memorable insurrection at
Manchester, which hid been ignorantly and stupidly
ascribed to the operation of the corn-laws, but which
had nothing whatever to do with it. It was in that
year, on the third reading of the Mutiny Bill, that they
were asked to pause in the passing of that Bill, on the
plea that the country would experience danger from
Military despotism. The lion. Member pursued his
course, and persuaded Lord Liverpool t ) reduce in 1822,
and he was obliged to restore in 1825. What took place
in 1826? Why they had a proposition from the Right
Ron. Baronet the President of the Board of Control,
then Member for Westminster, who said that he was not
prepared to go the lengths of the Hon. Member for
Montrose, but was prepared to insist on a reduction of the
number of men; and 34 Gentlemen supported him.
lie could refer to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs,
who was Secretary at War at that time, and who most
ably showed the danger arising from reforms of any
kind. He asked him whether he regretted the course he
then took ?—and, if he wanted additional testimony, he
could refer with equal confidence to the Right Honour-
able Baronet the Member for Tamworth, who was Home
Secretary in 1820, and ask him whether he did not
know that there was not one single part of the kingdom
that was not daily assaulting the doors of the Treasury,
and supplicating for military protection? The Right
non. Gentleman had referred to the maintenance of the
squadron on the coast of Africa. He admitted the in-
crease of suffering to the captives and the waste of
strength, but if the alternative was either to keep up
the squadron or become passive spectators of the slave
trade, let the question be fairly submitted to the coun-
try, and it would be shown what the general opinion
was. These were the grounds on which he bad always
felt it his duty to oppose the Hon. Member for Montrose
from beginning to end.
Mr. MITCHELL-said that he entirely dissented from
the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The pro-
posal he made was to reduce the effective force of the
country. He could not concur in reducing the effective
force of the army, or navy, or ordnance. He thought,
hots ever, that, except as regarded the treaty which had
lately been entered into, the expense the) were incur-
ring in keeping up fleets for the suppression of the slave-
trade was entirely thrown away. He thought that great
extravagance was committed in our docleyards; there
had been great over building, and a great many failures,
Which might have been obviated by giving an opportu-
nity for private competition. He placed implicit confi-
dence in the present Foreign Secretary—(Hear)—and
Erivately he had heard a great many Members of the
liouse express the same opinion. He had found the Noble
Lord throughout backing the cause of freedom against
the opinions of nearly the whole of the metropolitan
Press, as far as the press had any influence; he had
found him standing up in an unpopular cause, and for
the last two years he had never heard him swerve from
it. He was not for war; he did not believe it necessary
for this country to go to war; he believed that the moral
weight of this country had a great effect. The first
effect of reducing the navy at this moment would be to
encourage the idea that this country was so ready for
the doctrines of ultra economy, that it would not stand
up for the rights of nations. He thought that there
might be cases in which this country might go to war to
protect freedom. He was quite sure that the way to pre-
'rent this country going to war was for us to have an effec-
tive navy, so as to convince other countries that we were
prepared to go to war in defence of our rights, and in de-
fence of the rights of oppressed liberty abroad. For
these reasons, as long as the present Government pro-
Posed to keep up the effective force of the country to the
present amount, he should give them his support.
Mr. URQUHART observed that the Right Hon.
Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty had said that
the proper mode of meeting this question was by a vote
Of confidence; he believed that in this case the confi-
dence was not with the Admiralty. Having no confi-
dence in that department, he could not accept the pro-
Position of the Right Honourable Gentleman when he
said that the navy required as many men as were now
borne on the books. He firmly believed, however, that
the necessities and difficulties in which the Noble Lord
the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had involved the
country did require that number of men. He wished to
relieve the Admiralty from that incubus and oppression,
and he thought that the best mode of doing so was by
voting for the Honourable Member for Montrose, end
reducing the means of mischief placed at the dis-
Ansel of the Noble Lord. When the navy estimates were
debated last year, he had called the particular attention
of the Noble Lord at the head of the government to the
infraction of the law of this land and the law of nations
by acts perpetrated by our foreign board. The Noble
Lord might sneer ; but he trusted that his influence
would not so far have perverted the minds of the as-
sembly that they too would sneer. The Noble Lord
at the head of the Government would not sneer. The
Noble Lord, on a former occasion, had given bim a
pLAge that the law should not be violated. The ques-
tion they were debating was the employment of her
Majesty's forces, and before he gave his vote he should
require a guarantee that they would not be employed
as they had been in the Mediterranean. He trusted
that the Noble Lord at the head of the government
would favour the House with some explanation on the
Subject.

tord J. RUSSELL said that when last year the Hon
Member had asked him whether her Majesty's forces
Would be employed only consistently with the law o 7
nations, he had certainly answered without hesitation in
the affirmative; but now when the question was repeated
his answer must depend on the construction put on that
law. Without entering at length into a question fur the
discussion of which there would be future opportunities,
it appeared to him that Sir W. Parker had been fully
justified in the conduct pursued by him at Messina. The
Admiral had received no previous instructions, but
having interfered beta een the King of the Two Sicilies
and the Sicilians on grounds of humanity, he had subse-
quently received the approval of Government for his
eonduct. The Hon. Member conceived that instead of
approval, Sir W. Parker should have received letters of
recall, as having violated the law of nations.
8,„0 long, then, as the Government and the
ktonourable Member were so much at issue as
to the construction of the law of nations, it would
be quite impossible for him (Lord John Russell) to
give any pledge on the subject. He had hoped that the
lion. Member would have imitated the laudable example
Of the lion. Member for Bridport, and reposed confi-
dence in the Government ; but, as he required a guaran-
tee which could not be given, he must leave him to take
his own course.
Mr. URQUHART expressed his dissatisfaction at the
explanation of the Noble Lord, and would bring forward
a Specific motion on the subject.
S• ir W. MOLES WORTH complimented the Hon.
secretary for the Admiralty on the ability displayed in
his speech, and the frankness with which he had acknow-
;edged the presence of abuses in his department from
1831 down to 1848. According to him a new era of
economy and retrenchment had commenced in 1848,
Which therefore might be attributed to the efforts of the
!Inn. Members for Montrose and the West Riding.
-Last year the navy estimates exhibited a reduction of
208,000/., and this year of 730,0001., and so far Govern-
ment deserved credit for their exertions to reduce ex-
Penditure ; but there was still ample room fur further
reduction, and therefore he hoped that they
Would not relax in their exertions. With a
lieu, of ascertaining what reductions might be
made, he wished to call attention to the causes which
had led to the great increase in naval expenditure. That
increase might be attributed, first, to the increase of the
force of the navy; secondly, to the introduction of steam
Power; and, thirdly, to improvident expenditure in con-
nexion with naval works. The naval expenditure must
be classed under separate heads—numerical force, es-
tablishment., and dead weight. In the expenditure for
numerical force, he merely included wages and victuals,
Which evidently bore a direct proportion to the amount
of that force. For instance, since 1835 the amount of
force had increased from 26,500 men to about 40,000;
and the wages and victuals from 1,300,0001. to 1,900,0001.
It was obvious, then, that if they wished to reduce ex-
Penditure in these branches, they must begin with re-
Ltincing the amount of numerical force. The next
head was naval establishments, under which head
Were included six votes, for establishments at home
and abroad, for wages of workmen at home and abroad,
Stores, new works, and repairs. Under proper manage-
nient these items would have borne a proportion to the
amount of numerical force, but he found that they had
Increased in a much greater ratio. Since 1835 the ex-
Penditure for those items had increased 150 per cent.,
While the force itself had only increased 50 per cent.
."a fact, the expenditure had increased in exact proper-
l'on to the number of men employed in the dockyards.
ri 1834 the number of men so employed was 5,800; last
Year they amounted to 13,800.—(Hear, hear.) In 1334
he expenditure for those establishments was 1,000,000 L;
last year it was 2,500,000/.(Hear, hear.) The First
lierd of the Admiralty attributed the great increase to
the introduction of steam power; but in addition, the
-n. Secretary had honestly admitted that there had
Alen most improvident expenditure in connexion with
a department. Year after year ships had been built, ac-
Zuniulating only to perish of the dry-rot. During the last
4'o years 25 line-of-battle ships and 43 frigates had been
0d on the stocks, involving an expense of 2,500,000/.
n the Ist January, 1848, there were in commission 17
shim of the line and 32 frigates.. In ordinary there
ilere 64 ships of the line and 63 frigates. What was
'La use of such an enormous fleet, greater than those
employed at the Nile, Copenhagen, and Trafalgar, alto-
!ether? But notwithstanding all this, he found that
bay ear there had been placed on the stocks 20 line-of-
ttle ships and 16 frigates.—(Hear, hear.) The mate for for these was 2,000,000/., and they would require
24',000 men. The steam navy was returned last year at
! line-of-battle ships, 28 frigates, 48 sloops, and 28 gun
eessels, and would require 14,000 or 15,000 men. The
elPenses in this department had been enormously en-
hanced by what tho Secretary for the Admiralty had
lY designated improvident expenditure. The late
°Ttrnment, with little knowledge and no experince,

ordered no less than 21 iron steamers, but when nearly
finished it was found, by experiment at Woolwich, that
hey were wholly unfit for warlfko purposes. (Hear,
hear.) Some were abandoned; others were converted
Into troop •ships ; but in these last cases the
engines were found to be too large, and it
was not known what to do with them, although they
had cost 70,000/. It was suggested to put them in
90-gun ships, but that project was rejected by the
naval committee. It did not appear that greater sue-
cess had been attained in the wooden steamers. (The
Ron. Baronet here read a list of the wooden steamers
which had all been pronounced " crank," or " slow," or
otherwise imperfect, before the naval committee; but
the noise of conversation pervading the House prevented
our catching the names.) Such was the report of some
of our largest steamers; he trusted that there would be
better account of the 28 built last year.—(Hear, hear.)
Under the pretext of economy large sums had been ex-
pended on .the construction of steam-factories, it being
illeged that in such establishments vessels could be
be built 15 or 20 per cent. cheaper than by contract. He
disbelieved that statement altogether.--(Hear, hear.) In
private yards the object was to obtain the maximum of
work, while in Government dockyards it was the maxi-
mum of idleness, to which might be added the recent in-
sane attempts to convert skilful artizans into very in
different soldiers.—(Hear.) The building and repairs of
these factories might be set down at 2,000.0001., the
interest on which would pay the vole expense of
repairs if done in private yards. He had endeavoured
to stop the further progress of those works, being of opi-
nion that it was better to put up with the present loss
than to continue a foolish expendi'ure. It appeared to
him that if they really wished to reduce the expenditure
they must not only reduce the numerical force of the
navy—the number of ships in commission and the num-
ber of workmen in the dockyards—but they must take
care that no new works were commenced without taking
means to obtain beforehand a good and accurate esti-
mate of the cost. The last head of expenditure to which
he would refer was the dead weight. The amount of the
dead weight depended on the number of officers em•
ployed in the navy, and who were afterwards eligible for
retiring allowances, half-pay, &c. That number it
would be imagined would, after a long continuance of
peace, be considerably reduced.—(Hear, hear.) It had
been so in the army, but not in the navy. Since
1823 there had been a reduction in the dead
weight of the army of one-fourth, while in the
navy the decrease had been less than one-ninth. He
imagined that the number of cadets and admissions into
the navy should bear some proportion to the force kept
up and the number of men employed. So far from this
being the case, he found that the number of cadets
had been six times greater in 1846 than it was in 1847,
though the number of ships and men had increased only
one-third in the same time. This lavish admission of
cadets could not, he thought, be too strongly condemned,
as, besides the increased expense it occasioned, it pro-
duced disappointment, dissatisfaction, and discontent
amongst the officers themselves, as the natural conse-
quence of every rank being overstocked—and it occa-
sioned further that pressure on the Admiralty for war
promotion and war employment, which they found so
inconvenient, but yet so difficult to resist, and which had
induced them to put into commission more ships than the
number of seamen voted by Parliament could man. Hence
the continuous increase in the number of seamen, and
consequent increase in the naval expenditure—hence the
vast fleets scattered over every part of the globe, the
existence of which afforded to the Noble Secretary for Fo •
reign Affairs almost irresistible temptation to interfere
in the affairs of foreign states—to regulate the succession
to the throne in Portugal and Spain—to enter into a war
for the suppression of the slave trade in Africa—to con

test the diiine right of Kings in Sicily, and to-do he
knew not what in the River Plate. By limiting the
number of admissions they could limit the future amount
of the dead weight, but only by that means; therefore,
it was the duty of Parliament to insist that the number
of men voted should not be exceeded.—(Hear, hear.)
Of late years a bad habit had grown up of employing
more seamen than the number fixed by the House, and
of hiring more workmen than the number for which Par-
liament voted wages when the estimates were under con•
sideration. The consequence was, that they had, year
after year, votes for naval excess, and a continuous and
growing increase in the naval expenditure. The fact was
that the Admiralty fixed the navy, not according to the
will of Parliament, but according to its own will and
pleasure. The House should insist that on no account
should the number of men and the force voted be ex-

ceeded, unless good and valid reasons were given imme-
diately on the meeting of Parliament.—(Hear, hoar.)
He now came to the vote before the House, viz , the
number of men for the ensuing year. Last year the
number voted was 43,000, and the number employed was,
according to the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ward), 3,000 or
4,000 more; this year it was to be 40,000, being a reduc-
tion nominally of 3,000, but really of 7,000 men.—
(Hear.) This was certainly a good beginning. But
there was ample grounds for a reduction even to a larger
amount.—(Hear.) He agreed with his Honourable
Friend (Mr. Hume) on this subject, and would make the
reduction on the ships on foreign stations. There were
in all six foreign stations beside the Mediterranean
(which was not now considered as foreign), in all of
which our naval force had been much increased since
1541. The force on the East Indian and China stations,
including New Zealand and South Australia, be-
fore 1840 averaged 10 ships and 2,000 men. When
the war with China arose that force was, of course,
greatly increased ; it had Since been reduced, certainly,
but last year it amounted to 25 ships and 4,573 men.
He would reduce this force to 18 ships and a propor-
tionate number of men, as rec immended by the Com-
mittee on naval expenditure. This might safely be done
when it was remembered that the East India Company
maintained not fewer than 23 war steamers in thos.,
waters. On the Pacific and South American stations
last year, tho force maintained was 25 ships and 5,431
men, costing half a million of money. One half of that
amount would be ample for all our purposes, and would
be more than we had in those previous to 1842, or before

our interference in the affairs of the Plate.

This he

would reduce by 10 ships and 2,700 men. At the Cape

of Good Hope and the African station, previous to 1832,
there were 18 ships and 1,600 men. Last year there
was 37 ships and 4,647 men, costing 450,0001. The
Kafir war having now terminated, he would reduce this

by 19 ships and 3,000 men. The reduction he would
thus effect on these stations would be 36 ships and 6,000

men, and the force which would then remain would be

ample for the protection of British interests and British
honour.—(Hear, hear.)
Captain BERKELEY observed that the question be-
fore the Committee was whether they could safely re-
duce the naval force proposed to be employed. The
propriety of such a reduction, he submitted, could be
better judg_d of by practical men connected with the

depa.rtinent than by any of those gentlemen who had
addressed the Committee in favour of the amendment.

The lion. Member for Montrose had said that they were
keeping up a war establishment in time of peace; but
the fact was that they only asked for one-fourth of the
complement which would be required in the event of
a war, end with only one-fourth able sailors and three-
fourths raw men, our ships would not be too well manned
should a war break out. llon. Gentlemen complained
that many ships of the line remained in ordinary in the
harbours doing nothing, and in the same breath they
proposed to reduce the number of men, by the employ-
ment of whom alone they could be removed and brought
into use. It also appeared to be forgotten that to pre-
pare these ships for sea would cost not loss than 10,0001.
each. With regard to the surveyor of the navy, in de-
fending his conduct against the attacks made upon it, he
was only proclaiming what he believed to be the fact,
when he said that he had done more good for the service
than any man in England.

Mr. Sr. HERBERT, having had something to do with
that which had been called a profligate system of ship •
building, would say a word or two on that subject. The
increase had been occasioned by the necessity to pro-
vide a steam navy, and that object being now attained,
great reductions in this respect would follow as a matter

of course. The Hon. Baronet said that 21 iron steamers
were built, which were afterwards found to be useless

for war purposes; but he forgot to say that all these

except sixwere not built for -war at ail, but for the
packet service, for which iron steamers were found to be
well adapted. Now, with reference to iron as a material

for shipbuilding, the experiment did not seem as yet to
be sufficiently tested; for Captains Hall and Charley-
wood were the only two officers who had commanded in
vessels of that description in time of war, and their

opinions had still to be weighed by the scientific public.
He passed no judgment upon the subject himself. He
certainly had heard a steam navy described as con-
temptible; and once an American commander

had. declared in his presence that the Terribl3 went very
slow at twelve knots an hour, and that his American yea-

sel would go faster. Upon being asked, however, how
she would be made to go more rapidly, he professed him-
self unable exactly to tell; but he admitted that it would
be excessively dangerous to go at full speed.—
(Laughter.) He (Mr. Herbert) did not think that we
ought to keep up an extravagant line-of-battle ships;
but Hon. Gentlemen must recollect that, although we
had 71 line-of-battle ships at present, yet that we had
not got 71 which we could send into action; and that
the statements which had been made deprecatory of our
navy were not borne out by impartial persons either in
England or foreign countries. He did not recollect a
single ship which had been built by an amateur builder,
but he knew of many which had been constructed in
our dockyards by men who had been engaged upon ves-
sels for the merchant service. He wished that the naval
accounts were kept with a greater degree of simplicity,
for some of the items appeared so intricate, as to be
likely to lead to great inconvenience and inaccuracy.
Mr. WARD explained. The accounts were kept in
the usual manner, and it was difficult to alter the system.
Mr. COBDEN expressed the surprise with which he
had listened to the observations of the Right ROIL Gen-
tleman who had just spoken, after the Secretary to the
Admiralty bad himself avowed that gross—he (Mr.
Cobden) would say profligate—mismanagement pre-
vailed in the dockyards. Ho agreed with the Right
lion. Gentleman to this extent, that if we must maintain
the present system, with all its waste and mismanage-
ment, it was better for the interests of humanity that the
men should remain idle, and the vessels rot in inactivity
than in active service. He wished fora small estab-

lishment, but not an inefficient one. The terms were
not synonymous, but totally distinct in meaning. A
small establishment might be more efficient than a larger
one. Who that had seen the American vessel, the St.

Lawrence, at Southampton lately, could deny that she
was a model as regarded discipline and equipment? She
was a specimen of the American navy which did not
cost one-quarter as much as our own on the peace es-
tablishment. We might maintain an efficient navy at
less expense than was now incurred for that pur-

posy, and yet pay our officers and men as mac?'
as the Americans paid theirs, which was from 30 to 40
per cent. more than our own.—(Hear, hear.) Wo ought
not to hare more ships at sea than we could keep con-
stantly at work. Men kept in idleness would never be
efficient. The Hon. and Gallant Member for Gloucester
gelllotl to think that this was a question upon which

civilians should not resume to have an opinion; but he
(Mr. Cobden)nrodested against that doctrine. If the
point at is fee referred to the best mode of manning and
equipping vessels; ho might hesitate before venturing to
expre,s an opinion on the subject, but the question of
the amount of a pe.:ce establishment was precisely that
upon which a civilian was competent to form an opinion.
—(Eiear, hear.) No satisfactory reason had ever been
assigned fur keeping up the large p-ace establishment
which we maintained. Lord Auckland, to be sure, dealt
in some vague generalities about the necessity of be-
ing prepared for emergencies arising out of the
political state of the world ; but with reference to
that, he (Mr. Cobden), would call the attention
of the Committee to the state of the navy pre •
vious and subsequent to the breaking out of the French
war. On the Ist of January, 1793, before the commence-
ment of the w er, we had in commiss on 22 ships of the
line and 41 frigates, carrying together 18,739 men. On
the 31st of December, after the breaking out of the war,
we had in commission 78 ships of the line, 101 frigates,
and 76,565 men, being an increase of 58,000 men in the
course of one year. The Hon. Gentleman spoke of im-
pressment. He admitted that they could not have that
system again in this country. Every man would be shot
who attempted to drag another from his family like a
slave—(Hear, hear)—and public opinion would sanction
it.—(clear, hear.) Then they must pay men a bounty
to go into the navy, and for that reason he would pay
them as much as the Americans dld. But the Right
_Honourable Gentleman the Member for Portsmouth
said, the number of men must be a matter of confidence
in the Government. Why then were Hon. Members
sent to that House? Who was responsible for voting
this money? They were; and next year the Govern-
meat weuld fall back and accuse them of having voted
it. The Hon. Gentleman had taunted his Hon. Friend
for sums that were voted twelve years without his pro-
testing against them. But the Right lion. Gentleman
said this must be done with reference to other countries,
and that he could mention facts connected with other
countries that would justify the vote they were about to
give. The Right Hon. Gentleman, however, omitted to
mention them. Now, what country could be compared
with this as to its navy? He supposed America would be
said to be one. He held in his hand the report of the
Secretary of the Treasury to the Congress, giving the
expenditure for the years 1849 50. It appeared that the
American vessels altogether in commission were only 47;
there were only three line.of-battle ships in commission,
one being employed on foreign service, and the other two
being receiving ships. There were 21 ships of all sizes in
ordinary, and 11 on the stocks, making altogether 79 ;
whilst we had 440, 230 of which were in commission.
Then as to France, ho had in his hand an extract from
the Constitutimnel of the 20,h of September last, which
gave a summary of the French navy. It said, " The
Royal ordinance of the 22d November, 1846," which was
no sooner published than our Government took alarm
and set to work to increase our establishment, " fixed the
naval peace establishment at 40 ships of the line (24
afloat and 16 on the stocks), 50 frigates (40 afloat and
10 on the stocks), 136 vessels of an inferior class afl.‘at,
100 steam vessels (all afloat), and two floating batteries
with from 40 to 50 guns—total 328 ships. In November,
1846, the Navy Board, in order to complete the projected
establishment, had to construct about 17 ships of the
line, 27 frigates, 85 inferior vessels, 32 steam-boats, and
2 floating batteries. It demanded seven years and
93,000,000 f. (3,700,0001.) to execute the works. The
delay and the money were granted. The year 1847
passed away in preparatory measures. The works in
the arsenals were conducted slowly and confusedly.
The expenses were ill calculated, and the sum voted for
the wages of the operatives was exhausted before the
conclusion of the works nhich those wages were in-
tended to represent. The money allotted for the pur-
chase of materials was consequently applied to the
payment of wages. In 1848 the naval administration ap-
peared disposed to display more activity and more order,
A statement of the constructions to be executed during
the present year to make up for lost time was laid be-
fore the public. The revolution of February took place,
and the new Government lost sight of the navy in the
midst of the difficulties which surrounded them. The
French navy now consists of 24 sail of the line afloat,
38 frigates, and 86 steam-vessels. Of those 24 ships of
the line 12 require to bo replaced in consequence of
their age ; of the 38 frigates there are 19 condemned ;
and, of the 86 steam-boats not more than 70 are effec-
tive. The situation of the French fleet is, in fact, such
as it was on the Ist of January, 1846. As
compared ss ith the fleet of Great Britain that o
France is insignificant. As compared with other magi
time powers, it comes after Russia; and if the 12 ships o
the line and the 19 frigates are deducted, the French -flee
falls short of those of Sweden and Holland." The Consti

tutionnel next observes, that " it is impossible the French
fleet can be improved during the present year, inas-
much as the Minister of Finance requires a diminution
of 30,000,000 francs (1,200,000) in the navy budget.
That announcement has caused the utmost consternation
amongst the operatives employed in the French dock-
yards. Then, Russia had been the bugbear, but did
any one pretend that she could ever be formidable to
England as a naval power? Had not the Hon. Gentle-
men opposite maintained over and over again that our
naval supremacy depended on our mercantile marine?
but it was notorious that Russia bad none. She had
some 30,000 men half- sailors half-soldiers on the Black
Sea, but she really had no mercantile marine. Did any
one pretend to say that England could fear a naval at-
tack or any naval rivalry from Russia? Why, if America
had not a single war ship, and there was a rupture be-
tween her and Russia, she could go and destroy the
Russian fleet for ever. And we might do the same. This
was a question of reducing 5,000 men, but it involve:!
500,000/. or 600,0001., that might meet the case of Hon.
Gentlemen who wanted the remission of the hop or paper
duty. He thought his Hon. Friend, and the Hon. Mem-
ber for Southwark, had shown the way in which the
men might be reduced without danger. But they had
omitted one case. By a return on the table, it appeared
that for six years they had had, on an average, 2,000
men in the River Plate.—(Hear, hear.) In some years
the number was from 2,700 to 3,000, and on an average
10 vessels of war, and they did that to interfere in the
internal squabbles of two petty states, the population of
which together was not equal to that of one of our large
towns in the north. Was there ever such folly in the
world I—(Hear, hear.) He should be told, perhaps,
that the English merchants and the English consuls sent
for those vessels. He believed they would be glad if
there was no vessel of war on the coast, and that the
blockade was got rid of. If English merchants and
consuls unreasonably sent for ships of war, let the Go-
vernment tell them they did not keep ships to interfere
in other people's quarrels—it was much too expen-
sive a game. Then as to the African squadron, every
one had given it up. With China, he believed we
carried on the trade at an enormous loss, and that the
export trade of 2,000,000/. or 3,000,0001 was burdened
with a cost of 400.000/. or 500,000/. a year. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said they must keep fire ships on that
coast because they were bound by treaty. Who imposed
it? It was our own treaty, imposed at the point of the
bayonet, and the Chinese would be glad if there was no
ships on the coast. Nor would there be any breach in
withdrawing them. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite
Slid he had done so, and tried to keep up the communi-
cation by one steamer, but that the vessels were replaced
because the consuls said they were necessary. Those
consuls sometimes gave very bad advice. Ile himself
sew no danger in the proposed reduction. But, of all
the extraardinary plans for keeping up this armament
was that of the Hon. Member for Bridport. That
Honourable Member said he would keep it up be-
cause he had confidence in the Noble Lord the Foreign
Secretary, and because he wished to have a roving com-
mission over the whole world to set up I.berty and
constitutions. He (Mr. Cobden) admired our institu-
tions, and should wish to preserve them; but he was far
from thinking that we should send them, like our cali-
coes, to other countries and enforce their adoption at the
point of the bayonet. He therefore was against keep-
ing up a large force for that purpose. The Right Hon.
Gentleman was rather jaunty on the subject of 1835,
and said, he believed that that was thrown over, that it
was merely a struggle for place and popularity, and that
the reduction of 1835 ought not to be referred to be-
cause it was below a proper standard, and was followed
by great expense. If he (Mr. Cobden) were connected
with the Whig party he should be sorry to use such an
argument as that. How did the Whigs come into
office ? On the plea of retrenchment. The Duke of
Wellington's Government was turned out for its extra-
vagance; but after three or four years of office the
Whigs only reduced their expenditure 2,000,000/. or
3,000,000/., and now they said it was nothing but a
trick, that it was only a sale of old stores. He was not
susprised that they were loth to return to 1835. He
himself never contemplated returning to the expenditure
of that year but by steps. They had made one, and if
they did not make another that evening, it would be
not long before they took it.—(Hear, hear.)
Captain HARRIS was for some time inaudible, owing
to the general cries of" Divide." He said, it was true
prudence on the part of this country always to have re.
gard to the state of the French navy. The Hon. Gen-
tleman who spoke last had not stated the number of men
in that navy; for this year it was 29,000 men, and 11,000
marines; and with that force, they could, in a few weeks
fit out a largely increased fleet. He was opposed to the
system of impressment, and hoped the Lords of the Ad-
miralty would consider some well-digested plan for man•
ning the navy in case of war. This was a subject in
which he had taken much interest, and in reference to
which he had communicated with the late First Lord of
the Admiralty. The Noble Lord under whose adminis-
tration the affairs of the navy had been so well managed
had favourably entertained his plan; and he hoped the
Government would not allow this year to pass over
without something being done. The basis of his plan
was to render every man in the country liable to service

in-case of war; and he thought that would be much
preferable either to the system of impressment or the
plan proposed by the Right Honourable Baronet near
him.—(Cries of " Divide?')
Col. SIBTHORP asked when it was likely that the
discussion as to the salaries of the Lords of the Admi-

ralty would come on, as it was his intention then to pro.,
pose some reduction.—(Laughter.)
Col. THOMPSON said he had no doubt he should bo
expected to vote for the amendment, and he should dos%
—(Hear, hear.) He was fully confident that the Go-
♦ernment, if they chose, could find the means of reducing
5,000 men; but he must protest, both on his own account
and as believing that to act in a contrary manner would
not be agreeable to any one with whom he was concerned
—that he did not pledge himself to all the details which
had been laid before the Committee. lie alluded more

particularly to what had been said on the subject of the
African squadron. Ho had strong doubts as to the pro-
priety of removing that svadron. He believed the spirit
was still existing in 'the country which had led to the
employment of that squadron, and which had produced
all the measures connected with it; and he believed there
would yet be a defence upon that point. He could not
altogether approve of the way in which the coming re-
port of the Committee had been alluded to; but he
would recommend that report, when it did appear, to the
earnest attention of the house.—(Bear.)