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

---/

~l'

fox allow a ship to be constantly stationed at Cali-
'"lB.- There would be abundant opportunities of going
Cali-
;,,
'"18.-
the other details, and v.ll ho asked at present was
7'44 the House would carefully consider before they
4i °wed the motion of the Hon. 'Member. He had not
1„1114 ',elf been brought up in the school of extravagance,
ne trusted that after the large reductions which the
10,c4-,ernment had already proposed to make, the House
tictl4l Pause before they forced Government to reduce
the amount of men below that which was proposed by
e Vote, and which they believed was necessary to the
real service of the country.
It 4r. WO DE HOUSE said:that the Hon. Member for
entrose had brought an accusation against the county
tie..elltiemen, that they would not support him. Their
ea7,°ll for not having done so was, that he never would
-I,Y„ his view with respect to the reduction of the
Nvuebraent with a due regard to the circumstances
he Which the country was placed, and he (Mr. Wode-
Ae,e) vrould endeavour to show this by a retrospect
stetyear
conduct. He would begin with the year 1812.
year was a year of danger; there was no
a,;„erilai tranquillity in any part of the king-
fi;" There were insurrections in every part of the
lttlu°nl—amongst them the memorable insurrection at
i,..atichester, which had been ignorantly and stupidly
bad nothing
to the operation of the corn-laws, but which
nothing whatever to do with it. It was in that
WO/ on the third reading of the Mutiny Bill, that they
piere asked to pause in the passing of that Bill, on the
tja that the country would experience danger from
arse, despotism. The Hon. Member pursued his
4,71,8 e, and persuaded Lord Liverpool to reduce in 1822,
to he Was obliged to restore in 1825. What took place
826? Why they had a proposition from the Right
th.,7* Baronet the President of the Board of Control,
iAlember for Westminster, who said,that he was not
ttePared to go the lengths of the Hon.- Member for
t°lltrose, but was prepared to insist on a reduction of the
Afiber of men; and 34 Gentlemen supported him.
go ould refer to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs,
e
~ was Se at War at that time, and who most
11, showedcretar y the danger arising from reforms of any
th He asked him whether he regretted the course he
„,,en took?—and, if he wanted additional testimony, he
ald refer with equal confidence to the Right Honour-
• pute Baronet the Member for Tamwortb, who was Home
itJecretary in 1820, and ask him whether he did not
oti°ll, that there was not one single part of the kingdom
" Was not daily assaulting the doors of the Treasury,
titi supplicating for military protection? The Right
1,,0n. Gentleman had referred to the maintenance of the
„radron on the coast of Africa. He admitted the ins
;'ettse of suffering to the captives and the waste of
,lrengtb, but if the alternative was either to keep up
the squadron or become passive spectators of the slave
trade, Jet the question be fairly submitted to the coun-
tp', and it would be shown w%at the general opinion
fel. These were the grounds on which he had always
felt it • •
his duty to oppose the Hon. Member for Montrose
"EU beginning to end.
„.114. MITCHELL said that he entirely dissented from
'`e Motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The pro-
omo a.
t0„,,-- .4e made was to reduce the effective force of the
fa-,mitrY• He could not concur in reducing the effective
Je° of the army, or navy, or ordnance. He thought,
Otever, that, except as regarded the treaty which had
tillelY been entered into, the expense they were incur-
ttg in keeping up fleets for the suppression of the slave-
ide
was entirely thrown away. He thought that great
..raa
agance was committed in our dockyards; there
aoilt:',!en great over •building, and a great many failures,
bit." plight have been obviated by giving an opportu-
deY for private competition. He placed implicit confi-
f9ee in the present Foreign secretary—(flear)—and
p'retely he had heard a great many Members of the
Loarti,se express the same opinion. He had found the Noble
th„-4 throughout backing the cause of freedom against
t; Pinions of nearly the whole of the metropolitan
i,„!s, as far as the press had any influence; he had
tend him standing up in an unpopular cause, and for
lt, last two years he had never heard him swerve from
fot 4.,4e was not for war• he did not believe it necessary
a;it?iB country to go to'war; he believed that the moral
trf Rat of this country had a great effect. The first
tZt of reducing the navy at this moment would be toe,
theuraethe idea that this country was so ready for
,uoctriaes of ultra economy, that it would not stand
kri icbr the rights of nations. He thought that there
prole be cases in which this country might go to war to
veil',eet freedom. He was quite sure that the way to pre-
-4: this country going to war was for us to have an effec-
p e„L'avy,
toos as to convince other countries that we were
fer'ered go to war in defence of our rights, and in de-
al:it/ of the rights of oppressed liberty abroad. For
e reasons, as long as the present Government pro-
-1)1.44 to keep up the effective force of the country to the
„ant amount, he should give them his support.
e,. URQUHART observed that the Right Hon.
tli,"ternati at the head of the Admiralty had said that
of
eProper mode of meeting this question was by a vote
4,llsefidence; he believed that in this case the coafi-
„e Was not with the Admiralty. Having no confi-
bQo4„,:',e in that department, he could not accept the pro-
t%c,"orl of the Right Honourable Gentleman when he
ol' that the navy required as many men as were now
ttc,lle on the books. He firmly believed, however, that
Tiecessities and difficulties in which the Noble Lord
so,' Secretary for Foreign Affairs had involved the
lefiltrY did require that number of men. He wished to
it4tleYa the Admiralty from that incubus and oppression,
sot. he thought that the best mode of doing so was by
pro
for the Honourable Member for Montrose, and
po,l3,Fing the means of mischief placed at the clis-
ke, of the Noble Lord. When the navy estimates were
ti!ted last year, he had called the particular attention
isr Noble Lord at the head of the government to the
4Netion of the law of 4 this laud and the law of nations
~°te perpetrated by our foreign board. The Noble
a,", might sneer ; but he trusted that his influence
5t",,,t1(1, not so far have perverted the minds of the as-
te7ulY that they too would sneer. The Noble Lord
laote head of the Government would not sneer. The
(E) Lord, on a former occasion, had given him a
t
16, ee that the law should not be violated. The ques-
te they were debating was the employment of her
Oesty's forces, and before he gave his vote he should
tetl,tikire a guarantee that they would not be employed
th,`,"eY had been in the Mediterranean. He trusted
le),"e,tbe Noble Lord at the head of the government
tie', favour the House with some explanation on the
Ject.
t o a
k, J. RUSSELL said that when last year the Hon
ao,l'°oer had asked him whether her Majesty's forces
b `at•t'Ll be employed only consistently with the law or
th,o 48, he had certainly answered without hesitation in
144 affirmative; but now when the question was repeated
14wans_we.r must depend on the construction put on that
di. Without entering at length into a question for the
.
,"e lon of which there would be future opportunities,
jp,,P,Paared to him that Sir W. Parker had been fully
,I"lied in the conduct pursued by him at Messina. The
1141,1!3iral had received no previous instructions, but
Staill,g interfered between the King of the Two Sicilies
14, tee Sicilians on grounds of bumanity, he had subse-
eo,,,tltlY received the approval of Government for his
lipbmuet• The Hon. Member conceived that instead of
tes-etl°,val, Sir W. Parker should have received letters of
Se -1 as having violated the law of nations.
'ong, then, as the Government and the
00arable Member were so much at issue as
he the' construction of the law of nations, it would
impcssible for him (Lord John Russell) to
40,,Q pledge on the subject. Ho had hoped that the
Of at ember would have imitated the laudable example
dap lion. Member for Bridport, and reposed confi-
tet ato the Government ; but, as he required a guaran-
Ilia Which could not be given, he must leave him to take
Aria course.
e 8 r' 'URQUHART expressed his dissatisfaction at the
ti,oenation of the Noble Lord, and would bring forward
&„elfio motion on the subject.
%e'' W. MOLES WORTH complimented the Hon.
tetary for the Admiralty on the ability displayed in
leePeecb, and the frankness with which he had acknow-
lard the presence of abuses in his department from
eeer, down to 1848. According to him a new era of
tah°,lnY and retrenchment had commenced in 1848,
tio ea therefore might be attributed to the efforts of the
1,t44; Members for Montrose and the West Riding.
208"„ Year the navy estimates exhibited a reduction of
'OOOl., and this year of 730,0001,, and so far Govern-
deserved credit for their exertions to reduce ex-
qcliture ; but there was still ample room for further
ttetiuta and therefore he hoped that they
etild
not relax in their exertions. With a
eW of ascertaining what reductions might be
c9e, he wished to call attention to the causes which
i led to the great increase in naval expenditure. That
t7.rease might be attributed, first, to the increase of the
bn',lo of the navy; secondly, to the introduction of steam
better; and, thirdly, to improvident expenditure in con-
ta°n with naval works. The naval expenditure must
bs under separate heads—ntimerical force, es-
taie.lehraents, and dead weight. In the expenditure for
h"!'erical force, he merely included wages and victuals,
of:hell evidently bore a direct proportion to the amount
ftr-ga, force. For instance, since 1835 the amount of
bpd shad increased from 26,500 men to about 40,000;
,„,tne wages and victuals from 1,300,0001. to 1,900,000/.
pe,)",,,e1 obvious, then, that if they wished to reduce ex-
till,,iture in these branches, they must begin with re-
ilat;ll°R the amount of numerical force. The next
Were Was naval establishments, under which head
kid" included six votes, for establishments at home
stet abroad, for wages of workmen at home and abroad,
44'8, new works, and repairs. Under proper manage-
kilot these items would have borne a proportion to the
tect4Lit of numerical force, bat he found that they had
Pep,l?•eed in a much greater ratio. Since 1835 the ex-
hi)ltilre for those items had increased 150 per cent.,
in i° the force itself had only increased 50 per cent.
Ziet,ttet, the expenditure had increased in exact propor-
a 10 the number of men employed in the dockyards.
Yeitt 3,4 the number of men so employed was 5,800; last
he et°eY amounted to 13,800.—(Hear, hear.) In 1834
tatit'3q)enditure for those establishments was 1,000,0001.;
kietclYear it was 2,500,0001.—(Hear, hear.) The First
the . Of the Admiralty attributed the great increase to
kNiltatroduction of steam power; but in addition, the
,444 Secretary had honestly admitted that there had
4iad kost improvident expenditure in connexion with
tiAtZeiPartrnent. Year after year ships.had been built, ac-
beting only to perish of the dry-rot. During the last
,sitiJears 25 line-of-battle ships and 43 frigates had been
()11 eql the stocks, involving an expense of 2,500,0001.
altiltis
Ist January, 1848, there were in commission 17
Wore °f the line and 32 frigates. In ordinary there
the 4.64 ships of the line and 63 frigates. What was
Npi,,'° of such an enormous fleet, greater than those
)% tetti,:,.Y.,
11
eti at the Nile, Copenhagen, and Trafalgar, alto-
B tnotwithstanding all this, he found that
k
itttr.-! there had been placed on the stocks 20 line-of-
Zgate-esuiPs and 16 frigates.—(Hear, hear.) The esti-
-o,oooer these was 2,000,0001., and they would require
Men. The steam navy was returned last year at
vessel f-battle ships, 28 frigates, 48 sloops, and 28 gun
,11ist,41 and would require 14,000 or 15000 men. The
?seetosee in this department had been enormously en-
-I..„ehtly"by what the Secretary for the Admiralty had
liCovt,,,meeignated improvident expenditure. The late
""xlient, with WO,* gucl, uco experiace?

ordered no less than 21 iron steamers, but when nearly
finished it was found, by experiment at Woolwich, that
they were wholly unfit for warlike 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 70,0001. It was suggested to put them in
90-gun ship, 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
Hon. 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
alleged 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 artizens into very in"
different soldiers.—(Hear.) The building and repairs of
these factories might be set down at 2,000.000/., the
interest on which would pay the wole 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 expenditure. 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 era-
, 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 divine 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 er-
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
1841. 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:immonded 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 those
waters. On the Pacific and South American stations
last year, the 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 Caps
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 450,000/. 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
department than by any of those gentlemen who had
addressed the Committee in favour of the amendment.
The Hon. 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, and with only one-fourth able sailors and three-
fourths raw men, our ships would not be too well manned
should a war break out. Hon. 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 less than 10,000/.
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. S. 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 six were not built for war at all, 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 Terrible went very
slow at twelve knots an hour, and that his American ves-
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
nthoet got which
ewehteichwhwieeh choeudldheseenndmaidnetodeapertieoenelerayndef that
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.
ar. Mr. COBDEN expressed the surprise with which he
had listened to the observations of the Right lion. Gen-
tleman who had just spoken, after the Secretary to the
Admiralty had himself avowed that gross—ho (Mr.
Cobden) would say profligate—mismanagement pre-
vailed in the dockyards. He agreed with the Right
Hon. 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 for a 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-
pose, and yet pay our officers and men as much
as the Americans paid theirs, which was from 30 to 40
per cent. more than our own.—(Hear, hear.) We ought
not to have more ships at sea than wo could keep con-
stantly at work. Men kept iu idleness would never bo
efficient. The Hon. and Gallant Member for Gloucester
§cvLIN4 t 9 think I,IIA U4s waa a quation upon which

I civilians should not presume to have an opinion; but ho
(Mr. Cobden) protested against that doctrine. If the
point at issue referred to the best mode of manning and
equipping vessels, he might hesitate before venturing to
express au opinion on the subject, but the question of
the amount of a peace establishment was precisely that
upon which a civilian was competent to form an opinion.
—(Hear, hear.) No satisfactory reason had ever been
assigned for keeping up the large peace 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 war, we had in commission 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, bear)—and public opinion would sanction
it.—(l tear, 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 did. 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-
ment would fall back and accuse them of having voted
it. The Hon. Gentleman had taunted his lion. Friend
for sums that were voted twelve years without his pro-
testing against them. But the Right Hon. 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 Constitutbnnet of the 20th 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 aft,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 rum voted for
the wages of the operatives was exhausted before the
conclusion of the works which 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 be 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 with the fleet of Great Britain that of
France is insignificant. As compared with other mari-
time powers, it comes after Russia; and if the 12 ships of
the line and the 19 frigates are deducted, the French -fleet
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 requ'ires a diminution
of 30,000,000 francs (1,200,000 L) 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 had 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 involved
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 au 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
worldl—(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 2,000,0001. or 3,000,000/. was burdened
with a cost of 400,0001. or 500,0001. a year. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said they must keep five ships on that
coast because they were bound by treaty. Who imposed
it? It was our own treaty, imposed at the point of the
I 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
I said 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. He himself
saw 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
llonourable 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 liberty 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. lie 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
3,000,0001., 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 tho Ad-
miralty would consider some well-digested plan for man•
ning the navy in ease 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. Tho 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 llonourable Baronet near
him.—(Cries of " Divide.")
Col. SIBTIIORP 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 be
ex(pleicetaer, d thoea.
voter foiriethewaams amendment, ecnot,nfainddenhte
that
tultdh
edoGso.
so.
—([leer, hear.)
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. He had strong doubts as to the pro-
priety of removing that squadron. He believed the spirit
was still existing in jthe 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
egAOAt lA9IIOO of 6110 ii9llSo,—(Hear.)