The Sun.
London, England, 1866-08-15 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—A tour of inspection, conducted in ac-
cordance with official routine, has just brought the
Lords of the Admiralty to Portsmouth. After a
brief essay of his authority in the House of Com-
mons, Sir John Pakington will now have an oppor-
tunity of testing with his own eyes some of the de-
scriptions of dockyard management given by Mr.
Seely ; but the result will not be limited to official
impressions. An experienced naval officer has re-
cently observed that the public has now become
quite competent to' entertain these questions for
itself, and that the most purely professional disqui-
sitions may be addressed in the present day with
entire safety to the general reader. It must not be
forgotten, moreover, that we owe our first alarm in
this matter to Sir John Pakington himself. We
have it on his own evidence that England has not
reserves enough for the mere relief of her foreign
squadrons in time of peace, and it requires no great
effort to infer from this statement what would be
our position in time of war. Let us now see, how-
ever,what is the actual state of things as ascertained
by inspection at the chief naval arsenal of the nation.
At Portsmouth, then, there lie the Bellerophon, a
new and powerful ironclad, and the Valiant, another
ironclad, rigged, stored, and ready for sea, with one
material exception. These men-of-war have no
guns. This want, it is true, cannot be laid to the
account of the Admiralty, since the guns required for
sea service are furnished by a military board ; but
the fact remains the same. Besides these vessels,
there is tile Royal Sovereign, ironclad turret-ship,
not designed for duty at sea; a couple of frigates, the
Mersey and the Glasgow, reasonably efficient as
wooden ships go, and two or three smaller vessels of
similar quality. That appears to be the extent and
character of the available reserves at Portsmouth.
It will be asked if it is really true that half-a-dozen
ships represent the whole floating navy at this im-
portant port. We answer, by no means. There is
as fine a fleet of ships in Portsmouth waters as any-
body-20 years ago—would have wished to see.
Eleven magnificent line-of-battle ships, eight heavy
frigates, a floating battery, and a whole squadron
of gunboats can be shown to the visitor. A more
powerful fleet, as fleets used to be, it would be im-
possible to desire, but unfortunately, as fleets are
now, the array is all but useless. The ships are
without armour and without any guns which could
make an impression on' an armoured enemy. We
might, possibly, in the countless exigencies of a war
find some employment for such vessels in default of
better, but nobody imagines that a second Channel
Squadron could be formed out of such materials.
So wa see the whole truth of the case in this one
example. There is, indeed, a fleet at Portsmouth,
but it is a fleet unfit for service at the present day.
Now comes the second inquiry. What is doing at
our chief naval yards in the way of construction ?
What is Portsmouth producing in aid of our needs?
If we have no efficient " reserves" at present, how
soon shall we have any ? As far as we can see, a
single slOop is the only new vessel actually in hand.
The Danae, we are told, will be a very fine cruiser
when finished, and it is hoped that another equally
fine cruiser of a superior class will be ordered by
the visiting Lords to be laid down, but that is
speculation only. Repairs and outfits form the real
business of Portsmouth Dockyard—the real work on
which the votes of Parliament are expended. What
with new "works" and old vessels, there is neither
time nor money left for modern fighting ships. The
Dockyard artificers are engaged upon the Himalaya,
a good old troop ship ; the Scorpion, one of the
Mersey rams, condemned to transformation ; and
the Warrior. This latter vessel has now been
nearly two years in dock, and it is expected will be
there about a quarter of a year more, after which
she will be in as good a condition, it is hoped, as
when she was last put out of commission. When
there are two fine vessels " outfitting "—the
Minotaur, one of the swiftest ironclads in the
world, and the Royal Alfred, a wooden ship, con-
verted by ironplating into a powerful frigate ; but
these two also are waiting for their guns. We
fancy it would not be difficult to collect from these
statistics a general idea of the way in which money
is spent at Portsmouth. First, there is the expense
of preserving and maintaining that numerous but
worthless assemblage 'of vessels which represents
the fleet of the past. What does it cost us to keep
in repair all those line-of-battle ships, frigates, and
gunboats which are never likely to be sent to sea
again ? We should like to have that expense ap-
proximately calculated. Next, there are such
" repairs" as those given to the Warrior, which
consist apparently in pulling to pieces and building
up again, as if for the mere sake of the work. Then
there are the innumerable minor jobs which Mr.
Seely exposed—the outfits of new vessels and the
conversion of old—till, in the end, there is very
little money left for that business which the public
fondly imagines to be rather a proper work for a
dockyard—shipbuilding. Indeed, Sir John Peking-
ton himself, we believe, brought this broad fact to
light some years ago. The first elucidation ever
given of the great dockyard mystery amounted to
this—that there was only a margin, and by no means
a large margin, of the whole expenditure on the
navy left available for the construction of new ves-
sels. All the rest was swallowed up, or muddled
away in repairing and refitting old ones. This
system was bad enough in the best of times, but
when " reconstructions" became more radical and
more necessary year after year, it proved calamitous.
We must say we are no longer much surprised at
the deficiency of reserves. We cannot do every-
thing, even with such lavish estimates as those
yearly voted. If we must needs keep up' an old
fleet, we cannot expect a new one too. We have
plenty of ships which would have been very useful
in the year 1846. They are now about as useful
as postchaises, but we have taken such care of
them that we have had little to spare for
the substitutes which present times requires.
Happy the nation that had no navy ten years
ago ! That is what has sent the Americans so far
ahead. Every sixpence of their expenditure has
been upon vessels of real and immediate efficiency.
Nine-tenths of the ships in their Navy List have
been built or bought since 1861, and are, therefore,
serviceable in 1866. Nor is it only America which
is in this fortunate position. Brazil spends upon
her navy less than one million sterling, and yet
Brazil has a little fleet of gunboats superior to any-
thing we can show. She has actually 32 of these
formidable vessels, all iron-built, all iron-plated,
and all capable of steaming at a rate of at least ten
knots an hour. The smallst armament carried by
any one of these boats consists of. four Whitworth
guns, rifled, and throwing shot of 1501 b. weight.
Now, it has been seriously argued by persons of no
mean authority that .a squadron of small heavily
armed gunboats capable of manoeuvring together at
great speed would bet match even for a fleet of
frigates or line-of-battle ships, and in that case
what must we think of a comparison between Brazil
and England ? We need not carry these remarks
any further, but as we believe Sir John Pakington
to be a conscientious and well-meaning Minister we
cannot but conclude that his visit to Portsmouth
will impress him with the necessity of a radical
and immediate change in our system of Dockyard
administration.
MORNING HERALD.—There is an odd rumour cur-
rent that Mr. Gladstone is bound upon an autumnal
trip in the Mediterranean with Lord Clarence Paget,
whose flag has been hoisted for that sea. Consider-
ing the present condition of the British navy, the
worst built and equipped that was ever in the ser-
vice of the country, we cannot think that the pro-
posed excursion would be very agreeable, and we,
therefore, prefer to believe that the ex-Chancellor
of the Exchequer is not going to hang about the
neighbourhood of his lonian exploits. But the state-
ment has been made, and is uncontradicted. Should
it be true, Mr. Gladstone will have an opportunity
of learning in what stress our power afloat was left
by his late colleagues. The great and zealous Re-
former,side by side with the ex-Secretary, may inspect
the ruin, the waste, and the inefficiency for which
they are r esponsi bl e. Yet, serious as their answer must
be when the nation calls upon them to tell what they
did with the British navy, while it was in their
hands, we have no right to shrink from pointing out
who are the persons to be charged with the blame of
the humiliating and dangerous defects in our fleet.
In the first instance, of course, the distributors of
patronage. In the second, and practically, the
designers and constructors, whose pretensions have

been favoured and whose plans have failed.. These
men are now under the control of a new authority,
which is practically compelled to reverse all the old
decisions, to get rid of the jobbed appointments, and
to act upon an entirely independent principle. Be-
cause, never before, in contrast with the maritime
affairs of other nations, were our own so unequivo-
cally condemned. Every one knows that personally
the Duke of Somerset commanded respect and in-
spired confidence. He was, moreover, in earnest;
but it is only now that we are aware to what extent
he was blinded and misled. There is no use in minc-
ing matters. The fleet of England is a public dis-
grace. Its past history for seven years has been a
scandal, and cannot be retrieved. It represents so
many millions as completely sunk as the Russian
ships at Sebastopol. With whom does the respon-
sibility lie? With the late Admiralty. With whom
would the responsibility lie of continuing the present
perilous weakness and confusion? With those who
should confirm, through a mistaken delicacy, the late
Admiralty appointments. There must be some de-
partments, there must be some individuals, whom
the country is entitled to question upon the subject
of these deficiencies, which, in a time of crisis,
might be fatal. For the moment we refrain from
professional argument, but as a plain fact we would
ask whether the turret principle was not first pro-
' posed in England, and first applied in America ?
Was it not an English invention ? By whom has
its adoption been so strenuously opposed ? Upon
what grounds did their unexplained and inveterate
opposition rest? What were the favouritisms of the
late Admiralty Board, and are they to be in-
herited by its successors ? The whole ship-build-
ing world is crying out against our system, and
ridiculing its results. Yet it is the costliest upon
earth. We get worse than nothing for our money,
for we purchase at an enormous price a false sense
of security. Let Mr. Gladstone reflect upon this
while he traverses the classic sea. From above the
clumsy keels that cleave those waters, from the
brilliant circuit of shore whereof every spit and inlet
has a history, from the splendid gulf dividing the
discordanti liti of Europe and Africa, from the
voyages of Necho and Scylax, let:him turn his atten-
tion to the decks upon which he stands, and inquire
whether they represent, greatly and worthily for
England, that maritime power which used to be
called supremacy. It is all very well, and not diffi-
cult, to undertake a salt-water expedition, but could
our squadrons vie with all others where the Mistrals
and Siroccos, the Levanters and.the Birazones, blow?
It is only since Sir John Pakington entered office
that we have acquired the painful knowledge that
the British navy is half made up of lumber. The
First Lord, while admitting the general incomplete-
ness of the service, generously
.endeavoured to break
the force of Mr. Seely's complaints ; but the truth
came out, and it is to enjoy a sight of the dilapida-
tion wrought by his quondam colleagues that Mr.
Gladstone goes upon pleasure to the Mediterranean.
We have no exaggerated fear of the future. There
is no reason whatever to doubt that, on an emergency,
Great Britain could send to sea as glorious fleets as
ever ; but at present our navy is confessedly poor in
every important respect. Yet we are a seafaring peo-
ple. In the building of ships for war or commerce,
if wemay expect rivals, we should dread no superiors.
We have the materials and the men in abundance.
We have science. We could, if we please, construct
a hundred first-rates on lines running as finely as
those of a Thames wager-boat. Parliament has not
stinted the supplies. In our economy we have ex-
pended seventy-five millions sterling within the life
of any Administration upon our dockyards. We lay
out more upon patchwork than
i wouldi pay for a re-
spectable navy. Then, why s t ? Is it jobbery ?
Is it official favouritism ? Mr. Gladstone not long
ago broke into an ecstacy of indignation about
our national contempt of economy. May we hope
that when—amid the bland hospitalities of Lord
Clarence Paget—he courses the Mediterranean, he
will divert his schqarly mind from the wind of
Egypt, from the HoMeric laughing of the sea, from
Assyrian and Babylonian memories, from Hero-
dotus and Thucydides, to the wooden and iron walls
closely around him, which cost so much and are
pronounced so useless ? We have given up in this
country, probably for ever, all thought of being
mistress of the seas, of ruling the waves. But is
that a reason why England should become and re-
main absolutely inferior ? Is that a reason why her
best work should be paid for by foreign Govern-
ments ? Is that a reason why our boldest and most
masterly inventors should be neglected? We see
from far and near the mightiest efforts of concen-
trated power and ingenuity upon the waters of the
world, efforts constantly rising with the need of the
day—armaments triumphing in a strength which
the builders and battle heroes of the last century
wouldnot have dared to imagine—enormous forces
in swift motion—and our own small armada can
scarcely keep the sea in sight of the Bill of Port-
land. Perhaps, under these circumstances, Lord
Clarence Paget, with a sailor's sentiment, may
allure the vast-eyed Reformer of the period from a
too appreciative gaze upon the Lacedemonian hills,
the rocks of Scio, ;the white crests of Ida, and the
everlasting watch towers of Samothrace. Will lie,
among the reminiscences of that marvellous midland
sea, bestow a thought upon Chatham, or upon the
comparative value of our ironclads and, those of
other nations ? Will he answer our question-- What
was done by the late Government with the navy of
Great Britain ? They were engaged during seven
years in overhauling and tinkering up, and scruti-
nising inventions, and lavishing the public treasure ;
and they go out of office leaving a naval force, the
details of which their successors are ashamed to
recapitulate. Let us reflect for a moment upon the
reason why Englishmen are not more anxiously con-
cerned upon this subject. They trust too much in the
traditions of the past. They have seen the marines of
France and Spain go down before their own. They
have seen enemies chased, overtaken, engaged yard-
arm to yard-arm, beaten by strength of hand, and
captured by mere bulldog courage. Now, however,
all is changed. As well might Lancashire try to Manu-
facture against the world without the spinning jenny
as a navy endeavour to hold the seas without a per-
fect adaptation to modern requirements. We behold,
in every direction, people equal to ourselves in sea-
manship, quite as full of courage, ardent in the race
of improvement, and excelling us both in their build
and in the care they bestow upon essential details.
Already the consequence may be felt in a diminution
of the national prestige. It would be idle to pretend
that our navy enjoys the rank it occupied after the
day of Trafalgar. So far from it, we are actually
deficient in the proportion of our defensive arma-
ments by sea. The Admiralty itself tells us so. Our
resources are scanty, and as for reserves they scarcely
exist. There is a handsome squadron afloat, no
doubt ; but it could be no match'for the fleets of any
first-class power with an ally. It is eclipsed by the
new American navy. And all the time that this went
on—this diminution of our national safety—Minis-
ters were rioting in a prodigious expenditure, swell-
ing the estimates nearly every year, trying costly ex-
periments, meddling with the various departments,
and vaunting the triumphs of our dockyards. A
fresh Administration steps in and discovers that after
seven years of prodigality we have a fleet nine-tenths
of which would be practically useless in war. There
are hundreds of names on the list, but what do they
represent ? Dummies, structures obsolete, blocks of
timber work about as valuable for fighting purposes
as Carnarvon or Raglan Castle would be against a
modern siege. We have still an old-fashioned fleet,
and perhaps the poetic mind of Mr. Gladstone may
deplore the mechanical necessity of trusting no longer
to those majestic line-of-battle fortresses—those fleet
and fiery frigates—those high-masted towers of the
sea, that would have gladdened Nelson's eyes. If,
however, he goes to the Mediterranean, this time, with
a purpose, we beg to repeat our counsel, and ask him
to consider how many opportunities and how much
public money he and his colleaglies have wasted
upon a navy which can scarcely be called a national
defence.

THE POTATO DISEASE.—The potato disease has
reappeared in some parts of Norfolk and neighbouring
counties. At present the disease has shown itself chiefly
in gardens and on clay soils. Some fine dry weather
would, it is believed, arrest the further progress of the
calamity.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Consumption, and all nervous, billow,
stomach, and liver complaints, in every stage, are only ag-
gravated and accelerated by drugs of every description, but
perfecily curable by Du Barry's health restoring Revalenta
Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases which had
been considered hopeless ; such as indigestion (dyspepsia),
cough, asthma, consumption, habitual constipation diarr-
hoea, all gastric derangements, haemorrhoids, liver com-
plaints, flatulency, nervousness, biliousness' fevers, sore
throats, diphtheria, catarrhs, colds, influenza, noises in the
head and ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions,
hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, acidity, pal-
pitation, heartburn, headache, debility, dropsy, cramps,
spasms, nausea and sickness even in pregnancy or at sea,
sinking fits, bronchitis, scrofula, tightness of the chest,
pains in the pit of the stomach and between the shoulders,
&e. We quote a few.—Cure, No. 48,270. Mr. James Roberts
timber merchant, of Prim ley Surrey, of thirty years' diseased
lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, and partial deaf-
ness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme
nervousness, indigestion, gatherings, low spirits, and nervous
fancies.—Cure, Nu. 1,771. Lord Stuart de Decies, Lord-Lieu-
tenant of Waterford, of many years' dyspepsia.—No.4S,Bl2.
Fifty years' indescribable agony from dyspepsia, nervousness,
asthma, cough, const patine, flatulency, spasms, sickness, and
vomiting—Maria Jolly.- Cure No. 54,816. Tile Rev. James F.
Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, of indigestion and torpidity
of the liver. which had resisted all medical treatment.—
In tins, lib, 2a 9d; 21b, 4s 6d; 51b, lie; 121 b, 225; 241 b,
408.—Barry Du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, London;
also Phillips, tea dealers, 8, King William-street ; likewise
at 61, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 49, Bishopsgate-
street Within ; 63, 150, and 298, Oxford-street ; 330, Strand ;
54, Upper Baker-street; IC3, Tottenham-court-road; 96,
Upper-street, Islington, N. ; Harvey, Nottinz-11111; Close
Brothers, 65, High-street ; and Stubbs, Queen's-terrace, St.
John's-wood. London; and all respectable grocers and else-
mists.—Beware Pi apurioae imitations.