The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-07 00:00:00

ither sail nor„,kez-p to windward, and were in
!rice ill adapted-to blockade an enemy's ports;
all eon , and that class will never n ain appear
~t o' e navy.
8 gi.n brigs thcre arc none left; ome of diem
turned into ships at an expense of 8004 cr 900/,
did not answer. They have disappeared, togethir
with all the small craft of every description; their piece
Is been taken by a number of 16-gun brigs, built by
late Surveyor, and I believe they are considered
superior to the 18-gun brigs, both in weight of
metal and sailing. Bef,re they :ere built a class of
sloops were brought forward by different builders; they
are not bad vessels, and still in existence, but much in-
ferior to the three corvettes of the late Surveyor.
Another class of vessels was built__l mean the 10 gun
brigs; they were begun in 1808, when no less than 36
were built. I suppose they were intended to take the
place of the flat brigs, and they seem to have been built
with the same precipitation. After the war was over
we continued building—though for what purpose God
only knows—and launched no less than 64: 4 foundered
at sea, and 260 men perished; 6, turned into packets,
were ost with 168 men, beside 3 passengers; 7 were re-
duced in armament, and top-hampered; 35 have been
broken up or sold; 12 turned over to the Coast Guard
or breakwaters. I have before said that a number of
16 gun brigs have been built on the plan of the late
Surveyor, to take the place of the 18 gun brigs; and a cla:s
of 10• gun brigs, far superior to the old ones, took their
place.

To sum up the whole, we have got rid, in various
ways, since 1815, of 13 three-decked ships and 2 receiv-
ing Ships; 153 two decked ships and 22 receiving ships;
21 50's and 44's en two-decks and 9 receiving ships;
and 180 frigates (from 30 to 50 guns), and 17 receiving
ships; 65 frigates under 30 guns; 418 vessels of all de-
scription; under 20 guns, and 20 receiving ships. We
have built 14 three-decked ships; 49 two-decked ships,
one of which has been turned into a troop, one into a
os tnoere s i
ntiodpe, twoeoe
coal
dn
et into
oct)o novnicet hulks,burnt, oneone into
broken a I aze
pa,r eot tnee,
disappeared in Canada—leaving 4Q; 73 frigates, from 30
to 50 guns; 39 frigates, under 30 guns; 161 vessels of
ell deferiptions, under 20 guns, not incleding small craft
nod steamers.
In addition to the expense attending breaking up
ships and building new ones, thousands et' pounds have
been spent in altering ;hips' sterns and magazines. No
less than 28 ships had their sterns altered on Sir Robert
Seppings' plan, by a return of the 24th of April, 1846;
but the expense was not stated. I suppose they were
ashamed of it. Twenty-six ships of different sizes by
the same return, had their sterns altered on another
plan; some of theta twice, and the Botcawen three times;
some also that had been altered by Sir Robert Seppings
before were again altered on the second plan.
No lea; than 68 ships, by the same return, hal their
ma.;•.szirtes altered—one of them three times, and eight
of them twice. The expense, I suppose for the same
reason is, not returned ; but the reason given in the re-
turn was, " tln:t there was no means of ascertaining it."
The same return gives all the ships cut down, as 8 three-
deckers, 14 two-deckers, 10 frigates, 1 corvette. How
many more have been cut down since I have no Parlia-
mentary return to guide me ; but your Lordship may
form !an opinion of the total expense when it cost
52,8391. to repair and cut down the Dublin.
From 1815 to 1820 the navy cost the country
26 262,7834; in this are not included the wages and
victualling, which do not appear in the estimates.
From 1821 to 1849 the estimates amount to
156,975 858/; of that the dockyards have abserbed
44,396,0504, and the half-pay and pensions 47,4`)9,378t.
The navy estimates last year amounted to 7,068,7301,
of which ouly 2,079,003/. went for wages and eictuals,
while the dockyards and materials cost no less than
2,568,977/. It is in this branch that we ought to economise,
not in the ( ffective of the navy. Let us employ fewer
men and expend fewer materials.
I have shown what we have been building and pullieg
to pieces since the poser. Our ships c,uld not have
worn out so fast. We built bad classes of chips, and
hare been getting rid of them as fast as possible. We
built bad steamers, and have born oleigtd to build
others, and we are still in a wrong direction. We built
33 iron steamers that are useless, We Cult four or
five pair of engines that the steamers could not carry,
and we hare been obliged to bided mallet ones that
they can carry: there is where the waste Ir. The Ad-
miealty costs 136,3031.-4„500/. of which goes to the
First Lord, who knows nothing.
I shall say nothing about what is expended in the
improvement of yards, Le cerise that was necessary ;
but we wont too fast, partieulerly at Plymouth.
The half pay and promotions amount to 1,395,072/.
about two-thirds of the effective force. That would
diminish if they would lot it atone. Her Majesty has
only the power of granting pensions of 1,2004 a year.
The First Lord of the Admiralty can grant mere than
that in a day in the way of promotion. Ido not want
to stop promotion; but I would limit promotion to one
for every two removals—this to include everything. At
present it is nominally one in three ; but there are all
sorts of ways of evadir;g that, and it is evaded. The
Government must look things in the face—Legin in time
to economise, and show that they are serious. 'There
must be no more taxation—there must be reduction, or
there will be no more income-tax.
Naval officers, who are in the habit on board a ship
of watching the working of the artificer, and who aro
obliged to be economical in the expense of stores, as
few are supplied, know full well that we do not get the
work that we ought to do, and all naval officers know
the destruction attending the paying off ships. A ship
when first commissioned requires many arrangements
that it is impossible for the dockyard to do. During
the commission her captain puts her in order, and there
is a pride amongst officers to excel each otherl in the
order and beauty of their ships; there storerooms are
1 magnificently fitted, the stores of every description are
stowed away with the greatest care. After a service
of between three and four years the ship comes
home and is paid off with tho utmost dispatch, her
rigging, that would have lasted a year or two longer,
goes to the lot-yard, sails are condemned and cut
up, the storercoms are denuded, and the small
stores bundled on shore and no more heard of. What
an enormous expense would be saved if ships were
kept longer in commission; and, if they required great
repairs, another ship was brought forward, and all her
stores turned over to her to be worn out without going
into that fiery furnace, the dockyard. I have commis-
sioned ships and paid them off, and speak from expe-
rience, when the system of paying by measurement was
in force; everything that paid well was sure to bo de-
stroyed in an incredibly short time. When I commis-
sioned,the Galatea, which had becu in commission three
years, and was well fitted, it was all to begin again.
A Por;ugucse frigate that brought me home front
Lisbon was ordered to be repaired to a certain extent by
our Government. Thi destruction that took place was .
nearly as much as the Government allowed, and the
Portuguese paid the rest of the bills. Bad as their own
system was, ours was worse. Our deckyard peopo have
no idea that there is either waste of time or materials
in their work; all naval officers are quite aware of it, but
we are told we are no judges. Alterations cost an enor-
mous sum of money, and so du the whims of captains
who have interest to got alterations made. The
dockyards are paid by the day, and more than that
alterations cost money, and if those alterations were
fewer and more work done, fewer men would be re-
quired and fewer materials necessary. When a man
builds a house ho weighs well his plan beforehand, be-
cause he knows full well what alterations will cost hits.
The superintendents have too much to do; they ought
to have under them, for dockyard duty ony, an active
captain, who should be constantly irs the yard, with no
office work. The superintendent ought to have the en-
tire power of entering and discharging men when he
thought proper. If he jobbed the Admiralty could
punish him; but if the Admiralty job, and they are the
greatest jobbers, there is no one to punish them. The
" leading men" bare not authority sufficient over the
men under them; they are only paid a trifle more; they
move in the same condition, live, perhaps, next door to
each other; their wives and families meet constantly,
and zealously enter into the feelings of their husbands
and parents. How then can it be expected that
a 'mein,* man will choose to find much fault and
injure his neighbour? Instead of leading men there
ought to be well paid officers at the head of each gang,
so that ho would never come into contact with his nun
except on duty. Some sort of comparison might be
made of the work done by different gangs, and these
who work the moot and destroy the least should be re-
warded. There are too many heads of departments;
they interfere with each other, and the responsibility is
not well defined; and there is tco much office work for
the heads of departments, and they have not time alai-
ciently to superintend the various gangs employed is
different parts of the yard. When a ship is under repair,
the carpenter of the ship, or some one interested in her,
ought to have more power and some check over the
expense. And if a ship is preparing for commissioning,
the captain ought at once to be appointed to her to
superintend her fitting. If she is an advanced ship,
he ought to go on board immediately, and so ought
the officers and men. No hulks should be allowed,
and not a single man from the dockyard employed
upon her, except to wedge her masts. But I very
mire) doubt whether we have a ship at any port co
completely ready as to be able to receive men. We
are now very properly taking the masts out of the ad-
vanced ships because they decay. But I may ask how
they came in? The fact of decay was ascertained 10 or
15 years ago, the masts were removed, and it was found
we had hardly a sound mast in the yard. A neev.Admi-
ratty comes into office, and they try the same experi-
ment that was found defective by their predecessors. I
have said that I would very much reduce the dockyards,
but that should be done gradually by suspending entries,
and I very
Ty learn to b
muchhe doubtthee
nproprietyrolyf binrinlitgaunpd
apprentices.
never got the better of it. It would be much wiser,
when men are entered, that they should be chosen from
obliged to work
merchants' yards, where they are better looked after and
more, and waste less than in her
Majesty's establishments. There are many other
ways of reducing our overgrown er:tablishments if
we were inclined, but we seem to be going the other
way and are establishing steem factories, and if we make
engines there will be a great addition to the expense and
an end to imi revement. We have a factory established
at Portsmouth, with a staff that no private yard could
support. The factory and machinery cost abcut
100,0001., and I hope Parliatnent will move for a return
of the work they do, and compare it with what is done
in private yards. I believe in that factory we cmfloy
180 boilermakers alone. We had much better limit
ourselves to repairing engines and boilers, and let now
ergines and new boilers be made by private engineers.
If a strict band is not kept on cur engineers in the face
terries they will gradually go on entering men for repairs,
and when they have nothing to do will begin to make
engines, and if they are prevented from that they will
manage to take every steem-engine to pieces that comes
under their hands. To prevent that as much as possible,
and to employ our sea going engineers, when a steamer
is disarmed I should retain all the engineers and
the etvkels, and let the engines be repairctl 11 then'