The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-10 00:00:00

subject, for on evidence, gtven--bef his
smmbietliteeef
last May, that gentleman stated
that "no sea-going turret ship of moderate
duillitmetni-f
sions and high speed can be satisfactorily
an attempt were made to
o pfirrees7veAtevtehne
saanmeeartiampe-
proach to that all round
Mr. REED declared that Captain COLES'S one turret
ship was an embodiment of the strongest objection
which had been taken by himself and others to the
practicability of constructing satisfactorily sea-
going turret ships. Of course Mr. REED is fully
competent to form his own opinion on the matter,
and has every right to declare it in regular form, but
it must be manifest to every unprejudiced observer
that he cannot be an impartial judge, whose mind
is already made up, and that no system or theory
can be fairly tested if the inventor is coupled with
an individual who disbelieves in his principles. As
for the tests which the turret system have already
been submitted to at the hands of the Admiralty
we all know their nature. The Royal Sovereign,
not originally built by Captain COLES, but cut
down and altered to his design—never a satisfactory
method—has never been allowed a fair trial. So per-
sistently has she been kept in the background, and
declared to be unfit ftr the open sea without trial,
that ill-natured people have had room to declare
that such experiments as were made with her proved
too successful to please the Admiralty.

Mr. SEELY, after criticising Mr. REED'S capacities
as a shipbuilder somewhat severely, proceeded to
institute a comparison between one of Mr. REED'S
and a turret-ship built by Mr. LAIRD. Mr. REED
said in 1863 that "the smallest turret ship, carrying
but a single turret, if wholly armour-plated and
made seaworthy, must be considerably larger than
the Enterprise." Mr. SEELY therefore compared
the Enterprise, built by Mr. REED, with the
Minerva, turret, built at Birkenhead. " The length
of the Enterprise was 180 ft. ; of the Minerva, 180 ft. ;
breadth of the Enterprise, 36ft. ; Minerva, 35ft. ;
draught of water of Enterprise, 15ft. Gin. ;
Minerva, Bft. ; tonnage 9f Enterprise, 993 ;
Minerva, 1,000 ; horse-power of Enterprise,
160 ; Minerva, 140 ; speed in knots per hour of
Enterprise, 9.94 ; Minerva, 10.5 ; broadside of
Enterprise, 2201 b.; Minerva, 3001 b. They were
both plated with 4f inch iron in midships, and
tapered off towards the ends. The Minerva sailed
for Rio, and arrived there on the 12th of February,
in 30 days. So far, therefore, the comparison does
not support Mr. REED'S assertions, while a similar
examination of the qualities of Mr. REED'S Pallas,
and the Newcastle, designed by Mr. WATTS, re-
sulted in very similar conclusions. It is worthy of
notice that Mr. WArrs, who had formerly great ex-
perience as a constructor in the navy, gave his
opinion that the design submitted to him for a two
turret ship would afford greater protection against'
an enemy's fire than that obtained in any
other vessel, while he believed the vessel
would be a safe and comfortable sea-boat.
The late Prince Consort, who was always a friend
to scientific invention, took much interest in Capt.
COLES'S design, and Mr. SEELY read a letter writ-
ten by his direction, conveying his congratula-
tions to Capt. COLES on the success of his expe-
riments with the cupola gun. Had his Royal
Highness lived, no doubt, as Mr. SEELY observed,
we should have had the turret principle fairly tried.
To all this the representatives of the Admiralty
returned no answer, but on other points they were
forced to come forward. The wages of the dock-
yard labourers gave rise to a lengthened discus-
sion, the members who represented the dock-
yard interest speaking strongly of the lowness of
the pay as compared with the private yards.
On the other hand, several gentlemen, including
Mr. SAITUDA, no mean authority, stated that the
men in the Government employ possessed many
counterbalancing advantages, such as the regular
pay independent of the weather, the payment by
time instead of by piece, and the superannuation
allowances. There was a great deal of virtuous in-
dignation about wasting the public money, though
this objection was, we think, fully met by Mr.
°TWAY, who remarked that the sum required
to meet the claims he advocated might be
very easily raised in the dockyards themselves
by a little more economy in the construction and
frequent alteration of ships. The interference with
the duties of the Executive was also denounced,
and the end of it was that matters were left in stain
quo. It is no doubt the business of the Administra-
tion to regulate the wages of its employes of every
grade, and the advocacy of some hon. members was
1 as extravagant and inconsiderate as the opposition
of others was vehement and intemperate. But 14
shillings a week is a very low sum, and a man with
a family, if he wishes to keep them above starva-
tion point, must supplement his regular wages in
some means, so that his public duty is not likely to be
well done. The Government should certainly give
the men employed in the public service fair and rea-
sonable wages if they wish to get respectable
artisans, and 14s. a week will not keep the smallest
family in decency and respectability. Economy
certainly has a rare tendency to show itself in the
wrong places. We pension noble lords and their
descendants to the third and fourth generations, and
we allow an old servant of a Royal Princess to go
into the workhouse for want of 10s. a week. Our
Civil List shows us a good' many names,
" unknown to fame," though known to the
national Paymasters, but NELSON'S old companion
in arms is left to subsist on casual charity. Even
so Mr. REED may experiment with the annual
millions to his heart's content, but the idea of rais-
ing an artisans's wages 2s. a-week brings us a host
in arms, headed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
' telling us to be just before we are generous. Verily
we English are a strange people, and, officially at
least, are only consistent in inconsistency.