The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 16, 1860.

ordered of the number of defective gunboats and the names '
of the builders. The hon. and gallant officer was clearly
out of order in going into the state of the navy generally.
Sir C. NAPIER had thought it was as well to take that
opportunity of making a few observations on the general
subject; bat as the Speaker ruled he was out of order he
would content himself with submitting the motion in the
terms stated.
Mr. BENTINCK seconded the motion.
Lord C. PAGET hoped the gallant officer would not sup-
pose that the Admiralty had any wish to screen any parties
who had not performed their contracts, or come short in
their duty to the Government. So far from wishing to do
so, before even the circumstance was made known in that
house, or made public in the newspapers, they had taken
measures to ascertain how far they had the power of pro-
secuting such contractors as they thought had neglected to
perform the conditions of their contracts. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. and gallant admiral asked him to mention the
names of the gunboats which had been built with the short
bolts, and the names of the builders. He should have no
difficulty in giving that information, nor would the Admi-
ralty desire to withhold it, were itnot that they felt it would
be manifestly unfair to all parties that the names should be
given when the subject waa, to use the legal term, sub
jiidice. They (the Admiralty) were taking the opinion of
. the law officers of the Crown as to the propriety of prosecut-
ing certain of those parties, and he could not give their
names without prejudicing the public against them, and
perhaps unfairly influencing the minds of those who would
have to try the case. He was not prepared to say that they
would after all be in a condition to prosecute, but whether
or not he considered that it would be some time before a
legal case would be complete, the opinion of the law officers
obtained, and all the steps preliminary to a legal inquiry
before thdordinary tribunals taken. And as no man in this
country was to be held guilty before he was tried and con-
victed, he was not disposed to prejudge those persons by
making their names public. There could be no objection to
the second part of the motion, the return of the number of
gunboats fit for service so far as it could be ascertained, but
it should be borne in mind that the defects could only be
ascertained by close examination, and as many of the
gunboats were now laid up in ordinary, it world
scarcely do to take the men from the other work of the
dockyards to haul these boats up and examine them.
(Hear, hear.) Should the opinion of the law officers be
that there was no case in law against the contractors, the
Government would not object to any other mode of inquiry
the house might think it right to institute. (Hear, hear.)
Lord tOVAINE—AII that was required was the plain
simple fact what gunboats there were fit for service, in
what boats the defect of construction had been found, and
what were the names, of the builders of those defective
boats. There was no wish to prejudice the decision of the
courts of law, or to dictate to the Government whether they
should prosecute or not.
Mr. BENTINCK said there was no intention of charging
the contractors with fraud. What they wanted to know
was the names of the gunboats that were found to have
short bolts in them, and the names of the contractors who
built them, in order that the house and the country might
know where the negligence, by which the lives of hundreds
of men might be endangered, existed. He could not see
how information of that kind could prejudice any future
legal proceedings. His noble friend indicated that there
might be no prosecution at all. That, therefore, was a rea-
son for getting the information now. It appeared that the
information was given elsewhere, bat they ought to have it
on official authority. Ho was afraid the whole of the gun-
boats were thoroughly rotten, owing to the haste with
which they were built and the kind of materials with which
they were constructed. It was notorious that these boats
were in a bad state. The fact was known to the late Go-
vernment and to the House of Commons as well as to the
present Government. But if so, why was the survey of
these boats delayed till the present time ? (Hear.) The
Board of Admiralty professed to be anxious to keep up the
navy in an efficient state, yet they dismissed men from th e
dockyards, and now his noble friend told them that there
was a deficiency of halide. Owing to this circumstance the
vessels which at first might have been easily repaired were
now perfectly rotten. This appeared to him to bo penny
wise and pound foolish, and made him doubt the professions
that were made respec ing the efficiency of the navy.
Mr. WHITBREAD reminded the house that there were
16 of these boats at Hasler which were not reported upon
as yet. It appeared to him that the motion, therefore, was
premature. It would be unfair to give the names of the
contractors who built these particular boats whilst the
names of others were withheld, who for aught they knew
might be equally guilty. The gallant officer and the hon.
gentleman said they only wanted facts, but they could not
give the facts without raising a storm of indignation
throughout the country, which while the matter was still
under consideration would be contrary to that spirit of fair
play which characterised their proceedings. (Hear, hear.)
If the gallant officer wafted for ten days or a fortnight, he
would have that information which if given now would
have an appearance of vindictive hostility.
Mr. TAYLOR thought that the noble lord the Secretary
of the Admiralty had given a sufficient reply to the gallant
admiral. As a shipowner himself he knew that a perfect
supervision over the contractor was a matter of great diffi-
culty. (Hear, hear.)
Sir M. SEYMOUR said that the gunboats under him an-
swered extremely well. It appeared to him that their de-
fect was in the caulking, a circumstance which was com-
mon in contract ships. The character of the timber seemed
to have been the original sin; but it was very difficUlt to
find timber of the right kind in a time of pressure. 4e be-
lieved thatealt emater seasoned timber was used in France,
and that it had been found to answer very well. He recom-
mended the Government to make experiments with timber
seasoned in salt water in this country.
Mr. W. E WART hoped that the Government would
take precautions for the future, by insisting on a vigilant
and thorough inspection.
Lord PALMERSTON hoped, as this was a question of
time, and of very short time, and not a question of grant-
ing or refusing the information asked for, that his hon.
and gallant friend would not press his motion. (Hear,
hear.) His node friend (Lord C. Paget) stated that it
was the opinion of the law officers of the Crown that
the case of those" persons whom it was now their in-
tention to prosecute would be prejudiced if the
returns asked for indicated that they were guilty of fraud
or negligence in the construction of these vessels.
Whether they were so guilty or not would be the subject of
investigation by the prosecution now intended to be made.
If his hon. and gallant friend would only wait for ten days
or a fortnight, in order to see whether a prosecution could
be instituted or not, the information he now sought for
would, in case a prosecution, were instituted, be more ample
and complete than any which could be given in the return
he asked for ; and 'if it was found that a prosecution could
not be instituted•—that no legal grounds for a prosecution
existed—then, indeed, his hon. and gallant friend would
have good ground for requiring all the information that
could properly be given, and more ample information could
then be given, because there were sixteen boats which were
not yet examined, but which were about being examined.
To grant the return now might prejudice the case of some
contractors, and might appear to exempt others who might
be equally blameable with those who were guilty. (Hear.)
Sir F. SMITH said that a distinction should be made
between damage which appeared to be the result of bad
workmanship and damage which was the result of fair wear.
Sir C. NAPIER said the noble lord the Secretary of the
Admiralty and the hon. gentleman one of the Lords of the
Admiralty appeared to give a very lame excuse, and there-
fore the noble lord came to the rescue. He did not accuse
the contractors of fraud; he guarded himself most dis-
tinctly against that. What he asked for was the names of
the contractors of the vessels in which the bad bolts were
found. He thought the house and the country ought to
have that information. As to the storm being raised
against them in the country, the sooner it was raised the
better, if it was true that they had driven such bolts into
the gun-vessels. (Hear.) He (the gallant admiral) would
take the advice of the noble lord, but he was by no means
satisfied. He had not done with the matter, and in a short
time he should bring it on again; for he would never re-
main quiet until he had exposed to just reprehension the
persons who had been the means of sending 400 or 500
sailors to sea, and exposing them to possible destruction
within 24 hours after they had left port. (Hear.)
The motion was then withdrawn.
FISHERIES (IRELAND).
Colonel DUNNE moved for copies of any report or cor
respondence that had taken place between the Commis

sioners of Irish Fisheries and the Irish Government on the
subject of the censolidation of the Fishery Acts, together
with the memorial to the Lord-Lieutenant from a meeting
of the different boards of conservators of fishery districts in
Ireland.

Mr. CARDWELL stated that he hadprepared a consoli•
dation bill, but considering the pressure of more important
business he was not able to say whether he should deem
advisable to introduce it this session.
The return was ordered.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT (1858).
Leave was given to bring in a bill to confirm certain pro-
visional orders under this act, and for other purposes in re-
lation thereto.

TRAMWAYS (SCOTLAND).
Sir E. COLEBROOKE obtained leave to bring in a bill
;o provide for the formatio'n of tramways in turnpike and

statute labour roads in Scotland.
THE LATE PRIZE FIGHT.
Lord LOVAINE, in moving an address for copy of all
correspondence between the Home-office and the directors
of the South-Eastern Railway Company, in the year
1859-60, relating to the conveyance of persons intending to
commit a breach If the law, observed that he was not going
to make a speech pn the merits or demerits of prize-fight-
ing. On a recent occasion an exhibition of that kind, at no
great distance from the metropolis, was declared—rather
reluctantly and apologetically, he must say—but it was de-
clared by the Secretary of State for the Home Department
to be illegal ; and it consequently followed that those who
attended them or promoted them were accessories before the
fact, and ware as guilty as the principals. (Hear, hear.)
This instance was not the first on which complaints had
been made against the conduct of the South-Eastern Com-
pany. That company had been entrusted, as everybody
knew, with a very large portion—he might almost say, with
a monopoly—of the traffic in the counties over which their
lines nui; 4,11C1 they had. bow; warod of tiro illegaiitY 91044-

A;ahl