The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-30 00:00:00

LUDLOW:

The preliminaries having been taken for the for-
mation of a rifle corps in this town, a public meet-
ing, convened by the Mayor (Mr. Rodney Ander-
son), was held on Wednesday at the Town-hall,
and was numerously and influent:daily attended.
The borough members sent apologies for non-
attendance. The first business transacted was to
elect Sir Charles Rouse Boughton as captain of the
corps.
Sir C. R. BOUGIITON, who was received with
every mark of popularity, accepted the responsi-
bilities of the office, and said that although he had
left one of the best regiments in the service because
he disliked soldiering, he felt so deeply the impor-
tance and necessity of the present movement, that
he cheerfully joined it, and was ready and anxious
to promote it in every possible way. He urged
upon everyb&ly the duty of giving assistance either
as effective or honorary members.
Sir WILLIAM CURTIS and several other gentleman
having addressed the meeting, a list of volunteers
was opened, and the subscription list exceeded
£2OO, and was rapidly augmenting when our par.
eel was despatched. •

THE CASE OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL

It is in accordance with all official custom in this
country that after the commission of some porten-
tous blunder we have to publish a long official cor-
respondence. The object of this chain of letters is
always to explain atd extenuate, to show how the
blunder arose, and to shift the responsibility from

shoulder to shoulder, until the fault, like a slipper in
a Christmas game, is entirely lost sight of. This
time-honoured expedient has had its regular place
as a sequel to the mutinous riot on board the Prin-
cess Royal in Portsmouth harbour. We have in
regular sequence the narrative of Admiral Bowles,
an explanation from Capt. 13aillie, a general expres-
sion of opinion from the Admiral as to the expedi-
ency of the general Admiralty order, an amended
regulation from the Admiralty, a comment by Ad:

miral Bow lcs upon Capt. Baillie's evidence, a report
of a Court of Inquiry, and, lastly, a resolution of
the Lords of the Admiralty entirely whitewashing
Admiral Bowles and gravely censuring Captain
Baillie. This is very much what was to be ex-
pected. It is a little remarkable how largely Ad-
miral Bowles contributes to this mass of materials,
which are moulded at last into his complete ac-

quittal, and there is a great distinction, as every
one acquainted with the constitution of the Board
of Admiralty must be aware, between blaming an
Admiral and censuring a Captain—rexat censztra
colzeinbas.

In this case, however, Captain Baillie has not
proved himself quite a dove which, when sent out
over a troubled scene, would be likely to reappear
with an olive branch. We are free to confess that

the publication of these documents, although we
think they by no means justify the one-sided deci-
sion of the Admiralty, goes far to apportion the
blame between the Admiral and the Captain, and
even, perhaps, to fix the larger portion of it upon
Captain Baillie. It now appears that, according
to Admiral Bowles's opinion, the men on board the

Princess Royal were, at the time of the occurrence
which has occasioned this inquiry, suffering under
the operation of an unjust and most irritating rule
of service. " Nothing," says Admiral Bowles,
41 could be more injudicious and unjust than to treat
the officers and men lately returned from foreign
service as culprits in whom no confidence could be
placed, and who were to he imprisoned on board
their ships lying alongside the dockyard, while
every possible indulgence was extended to all around
them." Conscious, therefore, as Admiral Bowles
must have been, that these men were in a state of
irritation caused by a real grievance, it was doubly
his duty in dealing with them to exercise a more
than usual amount of caution and forbearance.
Captain Baillie, the officer in command, appears to
have delayed making any application to the Admi-
ral for power to grant leave until the men had be-
some almost furious at their restraint. " I am con-
vinced," again remarks the Admiral, " that if
Captain Baillie had asked my permission to give
leave sooner, the disturbance which took place would
never have occurred." When, however, at last Capt.
Baillie did make his too-long delayed application,
the Admiral gave him permission to send only one
watch on shore till Monday morning. The Captain
returned on board and communicated this to the
crew. 'We must place ourselves somewhat in the
position of these men, and conceive ourselves to
have been many months upon foreign service, to
have at .last arrived in harbour, to be lying close
alongside the shore upon which ourfriends are assem-
bled', and to know that to-morrow is Sunday, upon
which no work will be done, and when our stay on
board cannot be necessary, before we can properly
understand the disappointment of that half of the
ship's crew who saw their messmates going down
the side while they themselves were hopeless pri-
soners. We can scarcely wonder, however gravely
we must rebuke, that these men expostulated in
their rough way, cried out " All, or none," and
sent their petty officers aft to complain of the ar-
rangement. The evidence has now made it clear
that the part of the crew to whom leave had
already been given were not in any way mixed up
with this expostulation. They had got their
liberty, they were swarming into the boats, and
they were going to enjoy themselves without
making any common cause with their unfortunate
messmates, whom the caprice of the admiral, or the
" unjust and injudicious" rules of the service, de-
tained to sulk and sorrow on board. It was under
these circumstances that Captain Baillie returned
to the Admiral. Captain Baillie seems to have
sympathised with his crew, and possibly he enter-
tained the hope that by a general statement of the
great dissatisfaction that reigned on board his
ship he should induce the Admiral to reconsider
his determination, and give liberty to the
whole of the men. In this Captain Baillie
was undoubtedly wrong,—wrong in his course
of conduct, and wrong in his expectations.
Having to do with an Admiral so elow to yield
indulgences and so quick to order punishment as
Admiral Bowles appears to be, he should have stated
minutely the exact circumstances of the state of
his ship, and should have taken care to make this
old gentleman thoroughly understand that, when
he reported that the whole crew were in a very ex-
cited state, he meant only the whole of the crew
which were then on board ship, and not the liberty
men, who had already reached the shore. We think,
however, that any man who carefully weighs Ad-
miral Bowles's explanation will come to the con-
clusion that his conduct upon receiving this report
must have been testy and hasty. " I saw imme-
diately," he says, " that it was time to be firm and
decisive." It is now evident that he took this view
much too immediately. If he ,had asked Captain
Baillie the details of the circumstances he had re-
ported, how far the dissatisfaction extended, and
who were its organs, he would certainly have ar-
rived at an accurate knowledge of the real facts.
In a matter of such great importance as that of
a suggestion that one of the ships in harbour
was in a quasi mutinous state, we submit that
it is not too much to require even of an octoge-
narian Admiral that he should ask two or three
questions to test the accuracy of his own impres-
sions before he issues his commands. Admiral
Bowles did not do this. He could not possibly
have done this ; for, although Captain Baillie
had made an ambiguous, or an exaggerated
report, no one pretends that he was prepared to
give the Admiral false answers to any questions
he might have addressed to him. Acting promptly
upon the false impressions which he had taken
no pains to verify, he immediately directed Capt.
Baillie to revoke the permission previously given,
to grant no leave at all, and to recall the men who
had already been allowed to quit the ship. Ad-
miral Bowles now says that he did not know that
the liberty men had not joined in the discontent.
But he must have known, if he has a grain of sense,
that by calling back men under such circumstances
he was actually inviting, and even compelling, a
mutiny by stretching the requirements of discipline
beyond what human nature could bear. It may be
very well to say that Capt. Baillie should have ex-
postulated and explained. Before we adopt this
view we ought to know what likelihood there was
that any expostulation or explanation would be
endured. There is a tone running through the
whole of this transaction which seems to indicate
that Admiral Bowles is not a man before whom
subordinates care to appear unnecessarily or to
tarry very long. Capt. Bairns seems to have en-
dured the murmurs of his crew in the first iastance
rather than go before the Admiral, and endured a
wrong done to his crew in the second instance
rather than stand up against his Admiral and dis-
abuse him of an error ;but we do not think that
public opinion will go with the Admiralty in ac-
quitting Admiral Bowles altogether and throwing
all the blame upon Capt. Baillie.
Discipline must be preserved. This is a neces-
sity with which we cannot parley or palter. The
men who are entrusted with arms among peaceful
citizens must hold them upon the condition of
implicit and entire obedience to their officers.
Right or wrong, just or unjust, so far as they
themselves are concerned the commands of their
officers must be unhesitatingly obeyed. This is the
price the men pay for the advantage they enjoy of
mmunity from the vicissitudes of want and destitu-
tion, which civilians of the same rank of life must
often front. This discipline must be unreasoning.,
uncomplaining, absolute; but it is because this is
so, and because the necessity is so ,great that it
should be so, that we ought to require the very
highest qualities of forbearance, patience, conside-
ration, and tact in those who issue the orders which
must be so implicitly obeyed. If it be that no crea-
ture is or ought to be so helpless in the hands of a
superior as a soldier or a sailor, no act ought to
bie
considered so cowardly or so base as unnecessarily
to punish, oppress, or vex a soldier or a LairilorY
Old gentlemen, by long course of habit, and by.
custom of issuing orders which, although affecting
the comfort of thousands, are never seen by them
in operation, come sometimes to regard these mat-
ters lightly. "Men of the most jovial dispositions,"
remarks Burke, " have sometimes freely put their
names to documents which have set Europe on
fire." So very respectable old gentlemen sometimes
carelessly issue orders which make all our sailors
curse our service. This is what the present age will
not tolerate. 'We cannot, even if we would, deal with
men as if they were mere machines, withouthuman
passions. This matter would have ended better for
all concerned if Admiral Bowles had shown a little
more anxiety to reconcile his duty with the reason-
able desires of the men ; and it is certainly not with-
out some apprehension that we remark that the only
effect this warning has had upon the Admiralty is
to cause them to ism an order confirming the rule

..lich even Admiral Bowles has declared to be
injudicious and unjust, and rendering it even yet
more stringent than it had ever been.—Times.

TO Tar. EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—l find in the official correspondence con-1
nected with the case of the Princess Royal that in
a despatch dated December 13 Admiral Bowles,
after describing the riot which had taken place on
board that ship, recommends " that the severest
measures should betaken to crush this rising spirit
i
of insubordination n the British Navy."
But in a previous letter to " my Lord;," dated
November 20, Admiral Bowles appears to have ex-
pressed his opinion " that nothing can be more in-
judicious or unjust than the way in which officers
and men returning from lengthened foreign service
are treated with respect to leave ; that they are
dealt with as if they were culprits in whom no con-
fidence could be placed, and are imprisoned unne-
cessarily on board their ships, while every possible
indulgence is extended to all around them."
This being so, according to Admiral Bowles, I
would ask who is most in fault,—the inferiors who
resist these injudicious and unjust rules, or the
superiors who enforce them ? Who are the parties
respecting whom the severest measures are to be
taken to crush the rising spirit of insubordination ?
Does Admiral Bowles mean that "My Lords"
ought to go to gaol for being injudicious and un-
just ? or that the seamen, whom they treat so
injudiciousy and an justly, and who resent such
treatment, ought to go there ?,
I may be excused for being in doubt as to the
gallant Admiral's precise meaning, inasmuch as
" My Lords," in their letter of Dec. 5, declare them-
selves at a loss to understand the explanations
which he has offered to them respecting his own
part in the affair, and feel obliged to order further
inquiry into it. The haziness of Admiral Bowles'
language and explanations ought surely to prove
some excuse for the misconstruction which Captain
Baillie put upon his orders.—Your obedient servant,
Dec. 28. H.

IRON SHIPS AND THE WRECK OF
THE ROYAL CHARTER.

(From the Life Boat.)

How many " monster wrecks" has it been our
painful duty to chronicle during the past few years !
How sad is the reflection that their number appears
rather to be on the increase than on the decline !
During the present year alone have two great ships
perished on our own coasts, each consigning hun-
dreds of human beings to a watery grave. But the
other day it was the noble clipper Pomona, of 1,800
tons, a few hours only out of port, her voyage scarce
commenced, mistaking a light, running on an Irish
bank, and drowning no less than 385 of the unfor-
tunate beings who had trusted in her. To-day it is
the passenger steamer Royal Charter, at the termi-
nation of her long homeward voyage, thrown upon
her native shore, and yielding no less than 455 of
her unhappy inmates to the cold grasp of death.
instead of restoring them to the warm embraces of
long expectant relatives and friends.
A wholesale destruction of life and property
under more melancholy circumstances it is difficult
to conceive. _

The Royal Charter had sailed from the distan
colony of Victoria, in Australia, on the 26th of
August, 1559, with 491 persons on board, the ma-
jority of whom were returning emigrants ; these
having at last attained the object of their distant
pilgrimage, like the laden bee, were once more
homeward bound. carrying with them the fruit of
their labours, and anticipating, maybe, a long and
tranquil enjoyment of the same in "their own,
their native land." But alas, when apparently on
the poinlof realisation, these natural but too often
vain anticipations were scattered to the winds : and,
as in the parable of old, to each the awful mandate
went forth, " This night thy soul shall be required
of thee."
This unfortunate ship, on Nov. 25th, having hug-
ged too closely the Anglesey coast in search of a
pilot, was caught in the late fearful gale which de-
vastated almost the entire coast of Great Britain,
and was compelled to anchor ; but carrying away
all her anchoring-gear, she drifted on the rocks,
and quickly broke in halves: Although a line was
carried to the shore by an intrepid and skilful
swimmer from the ship, named Joseph Rogers:a
Maltese seaman, but few persons had time to avail
themselves of its aid ere the vessel and all beside
were engulfed together.
Two important questions here naturally arise :-
Ist. Was the anchoring-gear, that is to say, were
the anchors and cables of this ship, and are the an-
chors and cables of our merchant ships in general,of
sufficient strength, in sufficient number, of sufficient
weight, and sufficiently in readiness for immediate
use, to provide, as far as possible for the safety of
the vessels and their occupants in cases of emer-
gency ?
2d. Was this iron ship, and-are our iron ships in
general by their strength of build and scientific
construction calculated to afford, as far as possible,
safety to those on board them in the event of their
coming into collision with the shore or with other
ships ?
On the occasion of the wreck of the Pomona in
April last, we took the opportunity to remark on
some of the imperfections of our system of light-
houses, the loss of that vessel having been pre-
viously occasioned by the mistaking one light for
another. The present case affords an opportunity
for some reflections on the two points above alluded
to, viz., the presumed inefficiency in too many in-
stances of the anchoring gear of our merchant ves-
sels, and the presumed insufficient strength of our
iron ships.
Our remarks will be principally devoted to the
second point. On the first we will only observe,
that numberless wrecks are occasioned every year
by vessels dragging their anchors, or breaking their
cables, and by not having their spare or sheet an-
chor clear for letting go. It is therefore only a
truism to remark on the importance of the anchorin g
gear of a ship being carefully selected and of propor-
tionate strength to the duty devolving on it. The loss
of the magnificent steamship Prince, off Balaklava,
on the coast of the Crimea, with her immense, and
1 at that time invaluable cargo of military clothing,
the destruction of which occasioned such deplorable
suffering and loss of life to our brave soldiers before
Sebastopol, was a striking case in point. Had her
anchors been somewhat heavier, and her cables
somewhat larger, she might possibly have rode out
the gale in safety. The loss of the Royal Charter
is another striking illustration ; for who can say
that if her third anchor had been clear for letting
go, which it appears not to have been (the ship not
even being fitted Ns ith a third hawse-hole), who can
say that if it had been clear, and let go in proper
time, it might not have prevented the fearful loss
of life and of valuable property which took place ?
A standard size of anchors and cables proportionate
to tonnage ; a periodical examination and testing of
chain cables, as is practised in her Majesty's ships;
and an occasional careful examination of the an-
choring gear of at least every passenger ship by the
surveyors of the Board of Trade or of the Emigration
Commissioners—would probably be the means of
preventing many wrecks and much loss of life.
On the second head, we need only advert to the
number of iron ships which have been wrecked, and
have quickly broken up—a fact known'to all who are
conversant with the records of our maritime losses
during the past few years—to convince every one
of the importance of careful, diligent, and scientific
inquiry, as to whether the present system of con-
structing iron vessels may not be greatly improved
on. It has now been practically as well as theore-
tically shown that iron ships, as now built, break
up generally by separating amidships, far sooner
than wooden vessels, occasioning thereby a corre-
sponding increase in loss of lives. Of this fact the
case of the Royal Charter and of the mail steamer
Indian are the two most recent illustrations.

We have, in former papers, remarked on the too
frequent want of strength and general unseaworthi-
ness of our merchant ships, as being in great mea-
sure occasioned by the usual custom of insuring
vessels to their full value, and sometimes in excess
of it, so as to leave the owners little or no pecu-
niary interest in their safety, and inducing them to
build ships as cheaply as possible, rather than as
strongly as possible. We propose, more especially,
to quote the present case as the last instance
amongst many of the "insufficient strength of iron
ships as now built," and, in the name of humanity,
to urge on our Legislature, our Government, our
shipowners, our shipbuilders, and on our coun-
trymen generally, the great importance of the sub-
ject, and the necessity that exists for adopting a
stronger mode of constructing iron vessels, and
especially those which are employed for the convey-
ance of large numbers of persons, such as emigrant
ships, troop ships, and other passenger craft.
It may be replied, where is the remedy ? If it
could be shown that iron vessels might he con-
structed in a stronger and more desirable manner,
stuhreemly,esivehipsoowf suneresh awo: improved
but too glad to possess
article. 'We fear
that, as stated above, iovehsetaipboewtnearrstiealree,
but liot
the
in-
terested in
cheapest article. Viewed eveninawpetchuensiary, and
not in a philanthropic point of s
vie
one of national importance ; for althoughtl subject
ectthe
is
system of insurance the individual may protect
himself, yet every loss of valuable property is as
much a loss to the whole community as it would be
if uninsured ; the lo 33 is merely transferred to other
_ _

parties, and divided amongst a greater number.
As to the question of a remedy, it can be easily
made plain to the meanest capacity, that the art of
iron ship-baiiding has not kept pace with the gene-
ral scientific acquirements of the age, at least so far
as strength and durability are concerned; which

properties must always be amongst the chief desi-
derata in all human works.

The great weakness of iron ships appears to be
their tendency to hog, or break their backs, or to
break altogether asunder in the 'lnidship part ; they
have insufficient longitudinal strength. There is
the keel, to be sure, corresponding to the backbone
of the living animal, but which nevertheless is cap-
able of great improvement and strengthening.
There are the ribs and beams, corresponding to the
ribs of the animal, which in the latter keep the body
sufficiently distended and in shape, to contain the
various vital organs that sustain life, and which have
sufficient strength in a great measure to protect them
from biing crushed or injured. But the skin, that
beautiful, wondrous, seamless garment, which so
closely and marvellously envelops the animal, yet
permits of every requisite movethent of its limbs and
organs, the strength of which is so great that, even in
the smaller animals it can with difficulty be broken,
and which in the larger, such as the elephant, hippo-
potamus, and rhinoceros, is enormous; without the
protection of which the animal frame would speedily
fall asunder—where in the iron ship shall we find
its counterpart ? Can the thin iron plating with
its numerous perpendicular lines of weakness,
occasioned by the numberless rivetings of the short
iron plates, be compared to the animal skin, with-
out one weak spot over its entire surface ? It can-
nut be so. Yet, as far as possible, they should be
assimilated, for the same important use is required
of each. _ _

In wooden ships a much nearer approximation is I
made to the animal skin, since, owing to the greater
length of the planking, and the narrowness as corn-
pared with the iron plates, the lines of weakness oc-
casioned by the rivets are avoided. The greater
length of fibre of wood and its greater elasticity
may also be sources of additional strength:
An apt illustration of the strength of a skin of
planking, is that of the diagonal system in boat-
building, on which principle the larger boats in the
Royal Navy are constructed, as are also the life-
boats of the National Lifeboat Institution. Boats
built on this plan are almost without rib-timbers,
haying only a few short floor timbers, their double
diagonal planking being relied on solely to afford
the requisite strength, and they are known to be
the strongest description of boats.
The well-known ship-builder, Mr. Hall, of Aber-
deen, has successfully applied the same principle to
building wooden ships, and the Schoenberg clipper-
ship, of 2600 tons,which was unfortunately wrecked
on the Australian coast in 1857, was built on this
principle by Mr. Hall, and was supposed to be the
strongest wooden ship in our own or any other
merchant navy.
. Mr. Ralph Taylerson, of Port-Glasgow, has now
proposed to apply to a great extent, the same prin-
ciple to iron ships, and apparently with every pros-
pect of success. As the comparative shortness of
the iron plating, which we suppose is unavoidable,
prevents the application of the principle in precisely
the same manner as in wooden vessels, Mr. Tayler-
son places the frames, corresponding to the timbers
or ribs of wooden vessels in a direction diagonal to the
keel and sides ; each frame, like the planks of the
diagonal boat, passing from one gunwale across
the keel and up to the other gunwale continuously,
the iron plating being attached horizontally, as now.
As the lines of riveting of the planking or lines
of weakness thus run diagonally or obliquely to
transverse sections of the ship, whilst the cross or
deck beams run parallel to such sections, and are
bolted to different frames on the one side to what
they are en the other, a manifest vast increase of
strength to the whole structure against transverse
fracture is obtained. Mr. Tavlerson also introduces
other improvements, especially in the keel, to im-
part strength. We hope to give, in a future num-
ber, the substance of a lecture on his invention, by
Mr. Taylerson, recently delivered at the ball of the
United Service Institution iu London, illustrated
by designs furnished to us by the inventor for the
, better elucidation of his plan.
We think the importance of this subject cannot
. be overrated ; and we implore all builders and de-
signers of iron ships, whilst the loss of the Royal
. Charter and of the Indian, and the cries of their
dying inmates, in imagination, are yet ringing in
, their ears, carefully to consider Mr. Taylerson's
propositions, and to adopt them if no better can be
discovered.