The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-30 00:00:00

mated their opinion that she was not perfect. So of the
Sidon, resecti, i2' which a satisfactory report had been
p
received since her arrival at Lisbon. His Hon. Friend
had himself shown the House how high authorities dif-
fered in their oatimate of ships. He had mentioned the
Queen and the Albion, and had spoken of the latter ship
as a failure. But Sir W. Parker, in writing to Lord
Auckland, said.—
" I think well of the Albion; she does not sail so fast
as the Vanguard, the Superb, or the Canopus, and she is
said to be very uneasy; but the manner in which she
stands tip under canvass is astonishing. I wish that
Captain Lockyer had been allowed months ago to ballast
and trim her according to his own ideas, for he is ' every
inch a sailor,' and would have endeavoured to do justice
to her. I agree with him, that the ship is fully equal to
carry the long 68-pounders throughout on the lower
deck, and I confess that I should like to see it tried.
The Queen's sailing has generally been superior to the
Albion's. I have heard no complaint of her being un-
easy. In short, I consider her by far the finest ship of
her class that has ever been built; and, in a general
chase, she would probably be found amongst the best of
the two-deckers."
Where were the House to go for authorities if they were
not to receive as such the reports of officers of such
r
hlgh practical knowledge and experience as Sir
W. Parker?—(Hear.) The truth was, they had not yet
arrived at the high standard, or anything like it, which
the Hon. Member appeared to think possible. He ad-
mitted the necessity of bringing the best naval science
possible to bear upon the subject, but he wished those
who were in favour of re-establishing the Neva' School
of Architecture held the moderate expectations enter-
tained by the members of that body. In the first re-
port of Messrs. Read, Chatfield, and Creuze, in 1843,
they said:—
" It will be our endeavour to remove this misappre-
hension. In making this attempt we do not arrogate to
ourselves any new discovery; we merely assert that
there are no insuperable obstacles opposed to sure and
progressive improvement; that the course of proceeding
in other branches of knowledge is applicable to this; and
that inductive reasoning, based on mathematical investi•
gations, may be applied with eminent advantage to naval
architecture, as it has been to other branches of natural
philosophy."
Did the report say that the writers had the
power of making the most perfect model? No such
thing. Perhaps these gentlemen had not had fair play.
--(Hear.) He hoped there would be a great improve-
ment in naval architecture, but that improvement was
still to come. The evidence adduced by the Hon. Mem-
ber in support of his motion was of the loosest character,
and the House had shown its sense of it. If, as the Hon.
Member stated, 22,000,0001. of money had been wasted
and thrown into the sea, and yet that, after all this ex-
penditure, they had not a ship that was capable of meet
ing a French or American vessel, the motion would
have brought down every Member of that House to ex-
press his reprobation and indignation. With respect
to the question of re-opening the school of naval archi-
tecture, he confessed that the consideration of this
question was attended with a great deal of difficulty ;
but it was determined that that the boys in the docks,
who exhibited the higher abilities, which they wished to
encourage, would be transferred to a school at Ports-
mouth, and there receive an education fitted for the
position they were destined to fill, and then be returned
to their places in the docks, and made officers, as they
would be found to deserve advancement in the service.
Much obloquy had been thrown upon Sir W. Symonds.
He believed that officer to be as much under-rated at the
present moment, as he was over-rated in the earlier part
of his career. The House might rely upon it that the
Government would endeavour to bring as much science
as possible to bear upon the construction of the navy.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he should have
left the vindication of naval affairs to the Hon. Gentle-
man who had just spoken, if it had not been for certain
observations contained ix the speech of the Hon. Mem-
ber who brought forward the motion. The Hon. Mem-
ber stated that he had refreshed his memory this morn-
ing by a reference to what had taken place some years
ago. r He (Sir J. Graham) had not the same opportunity
that the Hon. Member had ; he had not looked at a
single document, or prepared himself in any way for that
evening's discussion. The Hon. Member would perhaps
permit him to say that his reference to that period had
made him (Sir J. Graham) melancholy. The Hon.
Member was poetical upon the subject ; he had talked
of the hand of the destroyer, and afterwards he had ven-
tured to affirm that which, on more mature reflection, he
(Sir J. Graham) thought he would regret ; he had ven-
tured to state Mr. Hawkes in 1835 had fabricated a report
for the purpose of misleading the House and the public.
That officer had died some years ago, with a reputation
as pure and unsullied as any gentleman of whom that
House could boast, and until that moment, not a whisper
had been whispered against his name or honour. There
were some great principles in reference to this subject,
to which he had no difficulty in assenting. He entirely
agreed with his Hon. Friend, that this subject was well ,
deserving of the consideration of the British Parliament. 1
It was the boast of this country that she possessed the
greatest and most successful Seamen of the world, tied it
ought, therefore, to be the desire of the country to pro-
vide the best vessels for them to sail in, which skill
and
experience could produce. He would not hesitate at
once to admit that he was responsible for the appoint-
ment of Sir William Symonds to the situation
of Surveyor to the Navy. He made that appointment
deliberately, after consulting the best authorities upon the
subject. The Honourable Gentleman who had intro-
duced this motion said that he (Sir J. Graham) had
once declared, that science was not the only quality
necessary to constitute surveyor of the navy; but the
Hon. Gentlemen had unintentionally misrepresented
him, for what he did say was abstract science alone was
not a qualification for the selection of a naval surveyor.
It was impossible in making the selection of such an
officer to have a due regard to naval experience as well
as science. Now, whatever might be the scientific
merits of Sir W. Symonds, no one would deny that he
had had considerable naval experience. Sir W. Symonds
had been one of the most successful naval officers of the
country; while, with reference to ship-building, he con-
tended there was no doubt whatever that the Gallant
Gentleman had paid a good deal of attention to the con-
struction of ships. Indeed, he had reason to believe
that the gallant officer's knowledge of ship-building
was considerable, and he possessed amply sufficient
scientific information and experience to render him
worthy of the office to which he bad been appointed.
Before he proceeded further to discuss the merits or de-
merits of Sir W. Symonds, there was one observation
which fell from the Hon. Member opposite to which he
(Sir James Graham) wished to refer. The Hon. Gen•
tleman observed that they ought to exercise the greatest
caution in believing what they heard. With the excep-
tion of matters of religion, he did not think so much
difference of opinion existed as upon the merits or de-
merits of Sir W. Symonds's ship- building. Having
made these few preliminary observations, he wished now
to glance at one or two of the other topics alluded to by
the Hon. Gentleman opposite. The Hon. Gentleman
seemed to think that it was an act of injustice towards
the school of naval architecture to have abolished
that establishment. Now, at the time it was
abolished there was no doubt whatever that it
invt+lved a very large outlay of the public
money, and as the benefits arising from the
existence of the establishment will not be sufficient to
justify its continuance,, it was abolished accordingly.
The pupils, however, did not suffer from its abolition,
for most of them were subsequently appointed to most
lucrative offices in the various dockyards of the country.
Now, with reference to the merits of Sir William Sy-
monds, the Hon. Gentleman had said that in this coun-
try the improvement of shipbuilding had not been pro-
gress •.. Now he (Sir James Graham) admitted that at
the time of the war -,orne of the best ships England pos-
sessed had been b .ilt in France. Another vessel
was also built about the same time by Si aW. Symonds,
called the Vanguard, which the :ate Sir Charles Paget
reported upon a trial of her to be an equally good vessel.
On the whole, therefore, he could not look upon Sir W.
Symons as a man being incompetent for the situation
he:held. Sir William Symonds had been continued
in his office by several successive Governments and
of course they must share with him the responsibility of
the Gallant Officer's appointment. Reports in favour of
his ships had been made by Admiral Stopford, Admiral
Hyde Parker, Admiral Byng, and many other distin-
guished officers in the navy ; and on the whole, he
thought Sir William Symonds had been highly success-
ful in his capacity of Surveyor of the Navy. With
regard to the expenses which had been incurred under
the Gallant Officer's direction, in altering and improving
vessels, he confessed he could not agree with the Hon.
Gentleman opposite, that it was money thrown away.
He believed that the money which had been so expended
would tend greatly to the public advantage, while it must
be clear that money could not be more legitimately spent
than in a time of peace testing the various
modes of building ships of war, and correcting
the defects which experience had demonstrated.
The Inconstant was built by an admirable naval officer,
a man of science to a considerable extent. The Eery
dice, again, was built by a distinguished naval officer,
not so much noted for his attainments in science as for
naval abilities. The Thetis was an improved edition of
Sir W. Symonds's style of ship-building, with the ad-
mitted faults corrected. The Hon. Member for Montrose
had spoken of the great expense incurred in the altera-
tions of the
Rodney;the lbinuetsshner
any
ys not built by Sir W.
Symonds, nor on
Some-
thing had been said of Dr. Inmaonf's his
ships.
certificate iSnona thee-
naval schools; he thought, however, that he had been a
very useful person in the'
shipbuilder he was
clearlydecideTlayntiootunnosufcyceosustrhul;but as
a
buzerfficient to qualify a
showing that science alone was not
t tile warned the
person for the duties of a shi
much to the
present Board of Admiralty not to trust
that
fathey did
Board,
dt board
newly constructed " board of constructioiro'
so, there would be no doubt that
would soon become like the Navy
when he was connected with the
he, by the consent of Parliament, abolished. The
present constitution of the Board of Admiralty was
most admirable; and if the suggestions of that Board
were fulls' and fairly attended to, they would be amply
sufficient, and he should regret that there should exist
any other beard to interfere with their decisions. He
advised the Government not to interfere with these de-
cisions ; et them remove Sir W. Symonds if be did not
give satisfaction, and appoint another surveyor, or even
two, but he would most certainly advise them not to con-
stitute any opposing navy board. He did not see any
benefit which would be likely to result from the appoint-
ment of the Committee or a Commission, and he should
most certainly oppose the motion of the Hon. Member
fur Mon t rose.—(C beers.)
Capt. BERKELEY could assure the Right Hon. Ba-
rouPt opposite, that his suggestions with respect to the
Committee of Construction should not be lost sight of.
That Committee was only consulted by the Board of
Admiralty when any new system of construction was
i 1 ass„•. , submitted to them. With r'speci to Sir \V. Symonds,
0c-,;•*-1: he begged to call the attention of the House to the early
-.\421,k^" servieee rendered by that gallant officer to the country; ,
''''' _ _ \ first
,of all, in the abolition of the 10-gun brigs.
\\„....
-c::

~~

WI i

~~~