The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-19 00:00:00

the service on which some member of this vigorous race
has not indited graphic commentaries or slashing replies.
At one time a letter on our national defences, at another
a reply to the Finance Association, bears testimony to
the energies of a family whose literary fame is imperish-
ably associated with the annals of the Peninsular war.
In our columns of to-day will be found a letter from its
naval representative to Lord J. Russell—a letter which
is entitled to public attention both by its subject and the
character of its' author. It has often been our duty to
point out the unreasonable and shameless extrava-
gance which has signalized our dockyard expenditure.
The favour with which the naval service is regarded by
the majority of Englishmen has served as a pretext for
iorofligate disbursements of the public money which
would have been tolerated in no other department.
The worst is that we have have had nothing to show for
our money. We have gone on adding extravagance to
extravagance, building and destroying, destroying and
rebuilding, refitting and pulling to pieces again, as if the
money were actually burning in our pockets, and we had
nothing else to do but to play ducks and drakes with it.
All this we have noticed before. The Committee of the
House of Commons on naval expenditure confirmed it,
a:though, as Sir C. Napier writes, there were no naval
members neon that committee. Sir Charles, doubtless,
could furnish instructive details of the manner in which
we have built three deckers that would not float, and
then rased them into frigates that would not sail ; bow
we have constructed brigs that necessarily went to the
bottom whenever there was a stiffer gale or a rougher
sea than usual ; and how the mere patching of some. 74's
cost more than the original build of first-rates should
have done. But Sir Charles confines himself to our
steam navy, and his experience is instructive enough.
Perhaps nothing could be more curious than the
following :—" After a long and patient investigation,"
he writes, "it was discoversi that in no instance
since the formation of a steam-marine had the con-
structor of the ship, the maker of the engines,
and the seaman been brought together to commit on one
of the most difficult points of naval architecture. It
never entered into the heads of the Admiralty, the con-
structor of the vessel, or the maker of the engines, that a
steam-vessel of war was comparatively useless unless her
engines and, above all, her boilers were protected fro=
enemies' shot; nor did they even think that it was ne-
cessary to have the maindeck ports in frigates sufficiently
high to use their guns when loaded even with the small
proportion of coals they were enabled to carry; the main
deck was in consequence never armed; but, nevertheless,
the Committee of the House of Commons reported that
we had 20 steam-irigates." These 20 turn out after-
wards to be 3, viz , the Terrible, the Sidon, and the
Odin. The rest are mere corvettes, which mount six
guns, and owe their appellation of frigates to the fact of
being commanded by Post-Captains. After the Admi-
ralty had fur some years continued to build steam-frigates
which were no frigates at all, and only imperfect steamers
—vessels which could not stow away the coal re-
quired for the power of their engines, and which
exposed their engines to the enemy's shot—Sir
Charles got leave to build the Sidon ; the engineer and
the builder were brought together, the plans were con-
sidered and reconsidered for months, and at last a vessel
was completed, which, though, as Sir Charles acknow-
ledges, far from being a perfect model, yet was free
from many of the imperfections of other steamers, and
was eventually able to stow away 700 tons of coal, and
carry twenty-four 68-pounders. But, strange enough,
though the Lords of the Admiralty had been taught by
the most ruinous experience the necessity of beginning
a new system a new system of ship-building, at the very
time the Sidon was building, two new steamers—the
Terrible and the Retribution—were also built on the
old system, and with the old success. The former, with
her 1,840 tons, and her 800-horse power, can stow only
500 tons of coals, has no room for troops or stores,
and, as Sir Charles well says, " is rather an expensive
advice-boat" The latter is of 1,680 tons, with an 800-
horse engine, "carries no maindeck guns, and is so ineffi-
cient that her power is about to bo reduced to 400-
horse." So much for their Lordships' appreciation of
experience! Nor is this all. "At this very moment,
notwithstanding the report of the Committee of the
House of Commons on the want of concert between the
shipbuilder and the engineer, they have never been up
to this moment brought officially together; and, what is
still more extraordinary, the Surveyor of the Navy has
not the power of summoning them into his presence and
pointing out what is necessary to constitute steam ship
of war." Again, Sir Charles tells us, "we are even now
working in the dark, and the four or five steamers on the
stocks will be more inefficient than those in the water."
So that the experiments of 25 years will have produced
nothing else but a succession of incapable steam ships,
of a hybrid description, " too large for corvettes and too
small for frigates." This is a national grievance. It
demands investigation on the score of national defence
and national economy. Those who do not regard this
as the era of perfect and pervasive peace will join with
the enthusiasts of economical pacification in asking,
" Wby have such large sums and so many experi-
ments brought forth so little?" But while wo cordially
concur with Sir C. Napier in his condemnation of the
rashness and blindness which have alternately prevailed
in the Admiralty, we cannot consent to accompany him
to the full extent of his judgment. We wish to have
our money's worth for our money. We think the navy
an essential source of strength to England, and we be-
lieve steam-ships to be an indispensable arm of the navy.
Here we are at one with the Admiral. But in his
auguries and predictions we part company with him.
We admit, indeed, that the French are at Rome, but the
very peculiarities of that fact incline us to believe that
they have no wish to find themselves in the same situa-
tion at London. That some of their steamers took 2,000
men a piece from Toulon to Civita Vecchia iu 26 hours
is very creditable to their celerity and stowage. But we
do not see that it proves at all their capacity for war
manoeuvres. Half of the largest steamers in the British
navy might have done as much, notwithstanding
their acknowledged inaptitude for the ends of
maritime warfare. We have yet to learn what
are the warlike capabilities of the French steam
navy under fire. As yet there seems no opportunity
likely to present itself for our edification on these
points. Till this has been vouchsafed us we may
acquiesce in the belief that it is at the best on a foot-
ing of equality with our own. There is no proof that
it is any better than our own, and, in the_a
absence of
f
proof, we may assume that it is not. As
ear; to see it
the French steam navy goes, we hardly
exppinclity that it
sailing up the Thames with the sr_s
We are as
steamed from Toulon to Civita Venac:hriaa.
little disposed as Sir Charles himself to believe in the
but—though
pacific predilections of our
Anglicans% minority in
there may be a violent
sanda, not least of all,
France—and though any. :vnari) good device for
a war with England, . might
diverting the passions of angry factions from the hall
of the Assembly and °the chair of the President—
yet we are convinced that one strong reason would—
all others failing—dissuad e the majority of the French
people from countenancing an invasafter all, iion of Esngthe best
land—
viz , our possession of a navy which,
in Europe, end of commanders worthy of that navy,
The Terrible may cease to be t.errible, and the Retribu-
Con may lose her paddles; but in the service which has
supplied Nelsons and Napiers, Englishmen are rash
enough to believe that there is a bulwark stronger
than the inventions of science or the mechanism of
engineers.

The Head Mastership of the Northern Church of
'England College, Fleetwood, has been conferred on the
Rev. W. A. 03borne, , of Trinity College, Cam-
bridge.