The Sun.
London, England, 1841-09-25 00:00:00

ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.

Captain BOLDERO said it was his duty to move the sup-
plementary Ordnance estimates, which would be the same as
those proposed by the last Government, without any alteration.
On the question that a sum of 2-1,772/. be granted for the ser-
vice of her Majesty, on account of Ordnance works and repairs.
Mr. WILLIAMS regretted that these large sums should Le
voted, without any explanation being offered to the House.
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote was 39,1931. for defraying the charge of civil
contingencies.
Mr. WILLIAMS said there was a large sum in this vote for
purchasing 200 acres of land in Canada fur the erection of for-
tifications. He thought the sum (25,000/0 quite extravagant
for so small a quantity of land, and wished to know where it
was situate ?
Captain BOLDERO said it was close to Kingston, and the
fortifications had been commenced so far back as 1632.
Alter a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY the vote was
agreed to.

-On the vote of 3,1851. for Ordnance stores being read,
Sir C. NAPIER would take that oppertunity of again call-
ing the attention of the Committee to the construction of the
Board of Ordnance and the propriety of having a naval officer
as one of its members. He was convinced that its duties could
not he properly discharged until that was done, and he did not
rise for the purpose of offering any factious opposition to the
vote, but because he was satisfied the Board would never give
satisfaction until the inconvenience was remedied. In 1830
he happened to be employed, and he would take the liberty of
reading au extract from a letter he had then written on the
subject to a distinguished naval officer. The Hon. and Gal-
lant Commodore here read an extract from a letter, in which
it was stated that the arms, cartouch-boxe.z, &c., were of the
worst possible description, and in many instances totally use-
less. When Lord Grey came into office he saw the impropriety
of not having a naval officer at the Board of Ordnance, and he
appointed Captain Duncan, of whose eminent services in that
office no one was better able to give an account than the Right
Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham). When Lord Melbourne
formed his Administration, he dispensed with a naval officer at
the Board, but he found out his error, and corrected it as soon
as he could, but now there was no naval officer at the Board,
and all the improvements that had been commenced were put a
stop to. When he was in Syria the number of arms deficient
and unfit for service was very considerable. The mountaineers
themselves would not take our arms because they were so ineffi-
cient. The Right Hon. Baronet had a son in the navy,
and a very fine young man he was, and he (Sir C. Napier)
wished that he would send fur the youngster, and ask him how
he liked being sent against the enemy with a musket that would
not go off, or that went off at half-cock —(l.i.iughter.)
Sir R. PEEL said it was very gratifying to him that any
son of his should have been honoured by toe notice of so dis-
tinguished an officer as the Gallant Commodore. He should
be extremely sorry to lay down any rule against the employ-
ment of naval officers at the Board of Ordnance, and he did
not under-rate the importance of the testimony of the Gallant
Officer, but he confessed he thought his (Sir C. Napier's) rea-
soning hardly supported his opinions, because there was a naval
officer at the Board at the tine he had alluded to, when his arms
were inefficient, and though he spoke with great deference, he
thought a military man was competent to take care of the
muskets.

Sir C. NAPIER—It never has been so.—(Laughter.)
Sir R. PEEL—I think the Gallant Officer has, without in-
tending it, made a great reflection on the military profes,ion
when he states that under their Administration he cannot be
supplied with muskets that will go off —( Hear, hear. )
Sir C. NAPIER said that the Right Hon. Baronet confined
his observations to muskets ; but he should like to know what
a military man knew about a gun carriage? He said the way
in which the navy had been supplied through the Ordnance
Department was always bad. No ships were worse supplied,
not excepting those of Mehemet Ali.
Mr. WAKLEY hoped, after the statement of tke Gallant
Officer, some change would be made in the administratian of
the Board. He wished to know whether any inquiry had been
instituted with respect to the invention of Capt. Warner.
Sir H. HARDINGE said the uniform practice at the
Board of Ordnance was, whenever a requisition was made by
the Admiralty for gun carriage, sor respecting any new inven-
tion, there was no difficulty in carrying their wishes into effect.
With respect to muskets, their construction for the army and
navy was the same. (Sir C. Napier—l beg your pardon. I
never found it so.) Nine-tenths of the business transacted at
the Board was military, and not naval business. He would
admit that there was often advantage in having a naval officer
at the Board, but to say that a naval officer must of necessity
be there was not correct.

Captain 'BERKELEY said he did not detract from the
merit of the Board of Ordnance in any way whatever, but
at the same time he assured the House, having been at two
Boards of Admiralty, that there was a strong feeling in both
Boards that the Naval Ordinance should lie completely sepa-
rated from the Military Board. What had fallen from the
Gallant Commodore as to the arms supplied to the British
army was most true. He (Sir C. Napier) had called upon
him and other officers to report on the state of their army, and
his (Captain Berkeley's) report was any thing but satisfactory.
At the same time, before he left the Board of Admiralty, a few
arms were produced as samples, and were about to be adopted.
Why they had not been of course he could net say.
SieC. NAPIER said he was glad to hear what had fallen
from the Right Hon. Baronet. He never saw yet, and he
had been forty years in the navy, a good musket or a good
eartouch-box, or a good lock to a gun in a man-of-war.—
(Laughter.) Where the fault lay he did not know. He
called on all tho-e naval officers in the House to say whether
he had exaggerated any thing in what he had said respecting
the navy that night. He said the Right Hon. Baronet paid a
bad compliment to the naval officers who were in that tlouse,
and who were Conservatives, that the Right Hon. Baronet
could not find one Conservative Captain for the head ()tithe
Board of Ordnance. Of course he (Sir Bobert Peel) would
not come over to his (Sir C. Napier's) side of the House.—
( Laughter.) When Lord Melbourne formed his Administra-
tion, he placed a naval officer at the head of that Board, and he
(Sir C. Napier) called on the Right Hon. Baronet the Mem-
ber for Dorchester, to say whether Captain Duncan did not
render most efficient service to the navy.
Captain PECHELL said the Right Hon. Bart. did not seem
to accept the invitation of the Gallant Commodore.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the Gallant Captain
bad given every satisfaction when at the head of the Board of
Ordnance. He ( Sir James Graham) always understood the
office of Clerk to the Board of Ordnance was filled by a civi-
lian. The military estimates were invariably moved by a
civilian in that House.

Captain PECHELL said it was remarkable that in no service
in the world were the arms so bad as in our ships.—( Hear
from Sir Charles Napier.) It was well known that the cut-
lasses were little better than iron hoops.—(A laugh.) He
knew that on the Coast of Africa they frequently served for
both purposes.---( Laughter.) When a naval officer was at
the head of the Ordnance improvements were made constantly,
but as the Board of Ordnance was at present constituted, they
might wait twenty years for those improvements.
Sir C. NAPIER—And not get them then. —( Lau.hter )
Captain PECHELL said the principal object for having a
naval officer at the head of the Ordnance was, that there might
be a direct communication with the Admiralty. There had
been a compliment paid to one relative of the
Right% Hon. Ba-
ronet (Sir R. Peel), and he hoped that anotherrelative, who
was at the head of the Ordnance, would giveo equal satisfaction.
Sir C. NAPIER said he had done hisbringing be-
fore that House the state of the Navy, and thetyin
arrangements of
its Ordnance. Whether the House would think proper to
adopt his suggestions he did not know ; he would not say he
did not care, for he cared a great deal. He would tell that
House and the Gentlemen opposite, that unless they
paid a little attention to this subject, the conse-
quence would be some disaster to them that would
gratitude to the
astonish them. He begged to express his
the Government fur having taken into their consideration the
state of the navy, and the manner in which it was manned. If
the present state of the na"y were continued, and-the manner
in which it was manned was not attended to, he had no hesi-
tation in saying that if it was brought into active service, it
would result in the most serious consequences. etboantsesqoube.necete.s. He sincely
hoped they would further attend'dthat the Board of Ordnance, in
Captain FITZ ti 0
inattentive to
the years 1819 and 118•20s,alha'd been by. no means
supplied a frigate with sights
the navy. In 1817 they had
from Sir W. Congreve. The Gallant Officer had overlooked
the third-rate guns and powder magazines, to which the Ord-
nance had paid great attentioa. The muskets supplied to the
navy were the same as those supplied to the army.
Sir C. NAPIER—No, no.
Captain FITZROY said, that both muskets bore the mark
of the Tower ; and although recently, since imprmements had
been made in the army musket, yet, up to a very late period,
the same species of musket had been supplied to both army
and navy.
Lord ARTHUR LENNOX said that if that were the case,_
the statements of the Gallant ( .fficer as to the inefficiency of
the muskets supplied to the navy were fully borne out, fur it
was impossible to conceive a more wretchedly ineilieicnt
weapon than the musket supplied to the Army.
Sir C, NAPIER said the Gallant Officer need not take
credit to the Board of Ordnance for supplying sights to the
Navy at the period he had mentioned, for sights had been in
use in the American Navy for three years before that period.
Colonel PEEL had only occupied the situation he had then
the honour of holding for a very short period, but he would de-
vote his utmost attention to the performance of its duties, and
would devote particular attention to the muskets to be supplied
to the military.
Captain BERKELEY said that was an additional argument
in support of the proposition of the Gallant Commodore. There
was a military officer at the Ordnance who would take care
of the interests of the Army, and they wanted a naval officer
there to take care of the interests of the Navy.
An HoN. AIE3IBXA thought the Noble Lord, the Member