The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 4, 1861.

works carried on by companies, Sir C. Wood was acting in
the bad spirit of the East India Directors. He had not
taken measures to promote the accumulation of capital in
India and to alter the tenures of land, which, with other
necessary reforms, were indispensable for theimprovement
of the country.
Colonel SYKES discussed the comparative advantages
of carriage by water and by railroads, and the obstacles to
the sale of land in India (except waste) in fee simple.
In his reply, Sir C. WOOD reminded the committee that
he was not raising money to meet a deficit in India; it was
to supply the wants of the home Treasury that he asked
this power.
The resolution was then agreed to.
THE DEATH OF ADMIRAL DUNDAS.

Lord PALMERSTON—I rise, sir, to move that you now
leave the chair, in order that the house may go into Com-
mittee of Supply, and I cannot refrain from taking this op-
portunity of expressing the deep regret which her Majesty's
Government feel at the great loss which the country has
sustained this very morning by the death of Vice-Admiral
Dundas, a most distinguished officer, who was for 45
years in the service of his country, and who equally
distinguished himself in every sphere in which he was
called upon to act. He was eminent for the good dis-
cipline and order of the ship which he commanded, he
was distinguished by the gallantry and good judgment
with which he conducted every naval operation in which he
was engaged, he was most valuable as a public servant in
the direction of naval affairs at the Admiralty. Whether
at the council-board or on the quarter•-deck his merits were
equally eminent, and his services were equally valuable to
the country. It would have been an omission of which we
should have been sorry to be guilty, if, upon this occasion,
in moving that you, sir, leave the chair, in order that we
may go into Committee on the Naval Estimates, we had
not expressed our deep sense of the loss which the
country has sustained, and had not paid a tribute of re-
spect to the memory of a distinguished and valuable ser-
vant who has been unexpectedly lost to the public service.
(Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON—I cannot refrain from begging
permission to add a few words to what has been said with
so much feeling by the noble lord, and to express the very
deep regret with which I heard this morning of the loss
which the country has sustained by the sudden death of
my gallant friend Sir R. Dundas. During the time that I
had the honour of being at the head of the Admiralty I had
the advantage of his assistance at the Board, and I am sure
that every one who was acquainted with that gallant officer
will feel as I do, that it was quite impossible to be connected
with him so intimately, to see him as I did from day to day,
without forming the highest opinion of his character, and
feeling for him the warmest friendship and attachment. He
was a distinguished ornament of the naval profession, he
was an honourable, frank, and straightforward colleague,
and I deeply lament his loss, not only upon those accounts,
but as a private friend for whom I felt the greatest value
and respect. (Hear.)
Admiral DUNCO MBE—I hope I may be permitted to
say one word to lament the death of my old and valued
friend, Sir R. Dundas. Many years ago I had the pleasure
and honour of serving under that distinguished Admiral.
I feel that the less sustained by the country by his death at
this moment is very great, because, as the noble lord has
said, whether on the quarter-deck or at the council-board,
his safe advice and his sound judgment were most valuable,
and II believe that it will be extremely difficult to supply
his place at that Board. (Hear.)
Admiral SEYMOUR—Having long known the late Sir
R. Dundas, and having served with him on the last oc-
cession on which he was at sea, I wish to echo all that has
been said with reference to the loss of that gallant officer. I
served with him as his second in command in the Baltic,
and have known him in every rank, the duties of all
of which he so admirably discharged; and I am deeply
sensible of the loss which the navy as well as the country
has sustained by his death. His judgment was based upon
great experience, and he exercised it with great advantage
to the country and to the naval service. I can well under-
stand how highly he was esteemed, and how :thoroughly
his merits were recognised by those who were connected
with him in office. (Heti r, hear.)
Admiral WALCOTT—I must ask the indulgence of the
house while I likewise express my deep regret at the death
of that valuable officer, Sir R. Dundas. He was perfectly
well known to me, and an officer of greater merit, of more
determined courage, or more resolute to do well in the ser-
vice of the country could not be found in the navy. (Hear.)
SUPPLY.—THE NAVY ESTIMATES.

The house then went into committee of supply on the
navy estimates, when the discussion on vote 10, of £3,489,477
for naval stores and steam machinery was resumed.
Mr. LINDSAY moved to reduce the vote by £lOO,OOO.
The hon, gentleman reminded the committee that in for-
mer years he had endeavoured to reduce the vote for
anchors. The Government always told him that there was
only one firm that could make anchors fcr the navy, and
that firm was the one which had supplied them ever since
1840, but he could never get any satisfactory explanation of
that circumstance. He only knew that the Government
paid £3,434 for anchors which might have been had from
other firms of equal eminence. They were now told that
there were only two firms that could make steam engines
for the navy. He was strongly opposed to expenditure in-
curred in that manner so unnecessarily, and so greatly
above the market price. He was the more opposed to this,
that the Government had announced their intention of
building so many wooden ships, that there could not be so
much occasion for steam machinery. He moved to reduce
the vote by £lOO,OOO.
Mr. CONINGHAM also oppos,ad the vote, and moved
to reduce the vote by £55,000 for steam machinery at
Chatham, if the motion of the hon. member for Sunderland
did not raise the question. •
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE complained that the Ad-
miralty should continue to give the preference to heavy
anchors after the necessity for them had passed away.
Four anchors of five tons each being needed, their great
weight at the bows of a ship of fine lines forward, de-
pressed her so considerably as to diminish her speed in a
very great degree. He believed they must in time substi-
tute iron for wooden ships, and the manufacture of ma-
chinery was therefore absolutely necessary. They were
now going to reconstruct their whole system, and cer-
tainly they ought to have a better adviser than the sur-

veyor of the navy. They ought to have a council
composed of men practically acquainted with iron ship
building, because they were only on the threshold of ex-
periments, which may cost the country millions of money.
Lord C. PAGET went very far with his hon.
and gallant friend the member for Portsmouth in his
opinion that they could not have too many investigations
into the subject he alluded to, which may cost enormous
sums of money. His noble friend at the head of the Admi-
ralty had given it his most serious consideration, and ap-
pointed a committee consisting of Sir John kLiy, Dr.
Percy, Mr. Fairbairn, and other officers who were engaged
for some time in making experiments on various kinds of

iron, and the class of ships to which it could be applied,
or might be built of that material. With respect to the
intentions of the Government as regarded iron-cased ships
to be built hereafter, he might say that great attention
had been paid by the other maritime nations of Europe to
this subject, which were more or less constructing vessels
of that class. The Government thought it necessary,
therefore, to commence five more, in addition to the seven
now in course of being built. These seven consisted of the
'Warrior, Black Prince, and Achilles, which were of the

largest size, and would be shortly mounted with their
guns; the Resistance and Defence, of a smaller size, but
of 3,000 or 4,000 tons, and the Hector and Valiant, of a
still smaller description. Those seven, as he had stated to
the committee, were now in course of construction, and five

more would be immediately laid down. Then as to whether

they should be built of wood or iron, it so happened that
they had already in their dockyards frames of wood already
laid down for 90-gun ships, which would be covered with

iron plates, and able to carry, after that process, 50 of the
heaviest guns. This class of ships would be extremely

valuable. They would have engines of 1,000 horse power,

which would give them a very high speed, and altogether
they would be exceedingly useful ships in time of war. The

hon. member for Sunderland had said his objection to this
vote was that ho did not know what number of engines

we were constructing. The answer was that altogether 64
engines were to be constructed. Of these there were only

five that were for line-of••battle ships. One of these was so
far advanced that it might almost be said to be completed,

and the others were also nearly so. Of course it would be
a loss to stop the completion of any of these engines in their

present state. With respect to anchors, if the hon. mem-
ber could bring any satisfactory tender for anchors of 70 to
100 cwt. at the Admiralty price, he was sure due considers-

tion would be given to them, but the Board did not fee:

warranted to entrust the construction of first-rate anchors

or chains to strange persons any more than the construction

of first-rate engines:What they did was to allow strangers
to tender for smaller works, and if they were executed

satisfactorily to permit them afterwards to tender for

works of a more important kind. They had also of late
largely increased the number of persons allowed to send

in tenders. With respect to the objection of the hon.

member for Brighton -to building one of the iron-cased

ships at Chatham, he was sure it-would be seen that in

entering upon the construction of a number of these new
ships it was most desirable that we should have at least

one ship of our own building to test and compare other
ships by, both as to quality and cost of workmanship and

material.

Sir J. PAKINGTON said he was much disappointed
with the explanation given by the noble lord as to the num-

ber and the armament of the ships about to be built. He
found that he had understated the other night the facts as
to the French slips of this class now in process of construc-
tion. There was another large frigate constructing at Tou-
lon. Altogether the number already built of various classes
and in process of construction was 25, and to meet these
vessels the Government told them that they were about to
lay down six, which with six constructed or in process of
construction would make 12. That was not a satisfactory
state of things to his mind. He wished very much that the
noble and gallant lord would state how this committee was
competent to carry on such an inquiry as that which had
been referred to, and he must, in conclusion, express his
disappointment that the Admiralty seemed not to be sen-
sible of the great naval preparations that were being made
in France. (Hear.)
_ _

Mr, E 1111441" concurred with the right 1,101, baronet in