The Sun.
London, England, 1859-09-26 00:00:00

TO. TUB EDITOR' OF THE TIMES:

Sir,—Taking a iiaxal officer's view of the above
subject, I trust I may again be afforded space for a
few words in reply to Colonel Simmons's further
explanation of his reason for wishing to man our
nary principally with marine artillery in prefer-
ence to scamori..

_ -
As in his last letter he admits that the " trained
seamen gunners .are as good as: marine gunners,and
from their being likewiie seamen *are-preferable as
gunners On board ships, being able,"tcr.'do duty in
their double capacity," I will consider the ques-
tion of " Who is the right man ?" as decided ; the
ordinary seamen have only to be trained as seamen
gunners, and a corps, admitted to be preferable to
a marine artillery is at once produced. The illustra-
tion-pude- use nt-though--" -for the --same - reason
seamen would 'be preforable in the engineer Aeparp-
munt,,instead of Lien . selected solely for their 'me-
chanical skill",;--is wholly erroneous, and in no way
applicable; for, with the exception of the engineer
officers, those in the engine-rooin bare no meehani-
calskill (unless " stoking" combs under such head)
and are seamen. They are aught to hand, reef,
and steer ; they wear the dres'S of seamen, and ,have
in every respect the,same characteristics. • -
The , question, 'therefore; is reduced to
This,—
whether, as the seafaring class of our population
does not afrord'a sufficient supply of seamen' gun-
ners, it would not be ddvisuble. to;recruit " lesspre-
ferable"-gunners that can be obtained from another
class. -

Granting for the moment that the marine of
England cannot, as now constituted, yield an ade-
quate supply of fighting seamen—which statement
I should be sorry to affirm myself—surely it would
he expedient, before deserting the source of all Eng-
land's greatness, to attempt rather to increase the
whole seafaring class of the country than to recog-
nise immediately the utter impossibility of obtain-
ing the most efficient style of men for our ships.
This would bo done,, by offering the superior in-
ducements in increased pay, &c., which Col. Sim-
mons disapproves. If the mercantile navy were to
offer corresponding advantages, the united compe-
tition would result in causing the peasantry and
other labouring classes to fill the vacuum which is
at present supposed to exist.
Therefore, discussing the matter upon Col. Sim-
mons's own premises, I cannot see that the necessity
is yet proved for establishing a standing sea army.
We all have our hobbies as to how men-of-ware.
men are to be coaxed from the merchant service
and permanently established in the navy, and I
have mine, but I have not entered into this discus-
sion in order to air any pet whims I ma', have on
the subject, or to advance suggestions which are not
called for, but to combat what I think a very dan-
gerous proposal, which could have been made by
only-an unprofessional man. The elements are the
creation of nature, the engine is the work of man ;
let us remember how liable is the latter to fail us,
and while adopting all its advantages, let us not
rely solely upon it, but retain in their full force that
race of men who know how to meet the various cir-
cumstances of the former, who while skilled gunners
are at the same time smart topmen, dashing
boarders, and plucky English seamen ready for all
work.—l have the honour to be, sir, your obedient
servant,
FREDERICK A. MAXsE, Captain, R.N.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—l should not ask for a corner of your well-
filled columns merely for the purpose of showing
that Col. Simmons has totally failed to meet the
objections to his views put forth by Capt. Mamie
and myself. Writing independently of one another
(my letter was delayed b the inexorable Post-
office regulations affecting Saturday night), we dis-
cussed the proposition of supplying the place of
seamen by marines in words the sense of which was
substantially identical, though in graphic force of
expression lam well content to yield the palm. I
think that few naval officers will be found to differ
from us, and I hope not many of the general public.
It will be sufficient to point out that no notice has
been taken of the arguments drawn from the pecu-
liar fitness of the seamen for 'naval warfare ; in bad
weather for boarding, for. cutting-out expeditions,
for the numerous emergencies occurring at sea, nor
of the assertion that none can, be spared from our
present complement while masts and sails are still
required.- I will leave any naval man to judge
whether the difficulty, about manning the boats has
been met. Nor did these remarks affect. Col. Sim-
mons's own example only, which I conclude he
now allows to have been faulty, but applied to his
general principle. I am, however, inclined to think
that one small improvement might be made in the
direction he wishes. Not one seaman can be
spared, not one boy (for these are the embryo sea-
men), but some of the ship's artificers might perhaps
be drilled as marines capable of taking their turn
at the guns. As these, however, are now employed
in connection with the magazine, not much would
be gained. One more remark may not be misplaced.
Col. Simmons has been forced to admit that the
trained seaman is pro tanto superior to the trained
marine, but he argues that we should make the
change he desires because the trained marine is bet-
ter and more easy to be got than the untrained sea-
man. Is he aware of the great improvement lately
introduced by the continuous service system, and
that every one of the men who enter under it will
be trained to a point at least equal to that which
could be expected of marines ? Further, the plans
about to be adopted for creating a reserve force and
for educating lads in mercantile ports involve gun-
drill as an essential ,portion of them:
But I set ont with saying I should not think it
necessary to touch those points again. I write espe-
cially to notice Cel. Simmons's eondemnatiori of
any approach to a compulsory system, however
limited and regulated. Here I cannot but think he
is in error, though it is by no means as demoastra-
ble as in the former case. If he reads the evidence
of those examined before the Commissio leeorMan
whi all con-
ning the Navy, he will find that
demned in strong terms the old barbarities of im-
pressment, with its gross irregularities, its unlimited
time and place of service, its absence of war-pay and
provision for men when suddenly turned adrift, yet
many of the very best and least antiquated of our
officers recommended different varieties of limited
and regulated compulsory service. lie will have ob-
served, too, that Gen. Shaw Kennedy and others
insist on the necssity of applying the ballot, in order
to procure a-local, over-and above the regular mili-
tia, as essential in any system of defence we may
adopt. Now, if the principle is once admitted on
shore, why must it "lead to open resistanse" among
seamen ? Except on the immediate imminence of
and ballot would only act as col-
war, the registry
letting the assigned proportion of men together for
drill at certain periods. When required every person
would have his allotted place in the ranks of his
country's ("Mem ders,an d when the difference between
this system and the old impressment was once fairly
understood, I believe the opinion of the public
would clearly pronounce itself in its favour. I be-
lieve it may be shown that the pressgang, with all
its horrors, was forced on the Government in the
old war by the people themselves. If the.safety, of
the country does really depend on the adoytion
of this principle, it is certainly very undesirable
that it should be simply pooh-poohed. But if so,
this is a story, I maintain, we are not even thenre-
duced to " tell to the marines."—l am, sir, your obe-
dient servant, A NAVAL ()Mg t.&
Sept. 23.