The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-23 00:00:00

plied to make good a deficiency upon another vote,
even with the sanction of the Treasury.
18th. That the power of the Treasury to increase
the expenditure on one item of a vote by applying
the moneys voted on another item of the same vote
should be limited.
19th. That vote No. 10 be divided into five votes
under the heads of-
1. Timber.
2. Other stores.
3. Vessels built by contract.
and that each vote should be set out in detail, show-
ing the establishment in each case ; the different
descriptions of timber and other stores to be pur-
chased ; the names of vesselsto be built by contract,
their armament, horse-power, and estimated cost ;
and the ships for which the steam machinery is to
be provided.
20th. That a return to Parliament of the ex-
penses incurred on your Majesty's ships should be
made in the form annexed, marked A, and be laid
on the table of the House of Commons with the
Navy Estimates.
IL—PURCHASE OE MATERIALS AND STORES.
11. We have found a general complaint in the
dockyards as to the mode in which stores are sup-
plied. In some cases it has been a want of certain
articles which has delayed the progress of the
works. In others the complaint has been, espe-
cially with regard to timber, that the descriptions
sent have not been in accordance with the requisi-
tions from the officers of the yards.
12. We consider that the suggestion we have
made under the head of " Control," to the effect
that the department of the Storekeeper-General of
the Navy should be placed under the control of the
Controller-General, will have the effect of making
that department work harmoniously with the
other departments in the dockyards, and of remov-
ing the causes of complaint just adverted to.
13. We would further suggest under this head :
Ist. That the large contracts, especially' for
timber, should be more divided.
2d. That the period for which standing contracts
are entered into should be reduced.
3d. That timber not of contract dimensions, or in
excess of the quantity required, should be. rejected,
instead of being received under the authority of the
Storekeeper-General, as at present. This was re-
commended by the Committee of Revision of 1848,
of which Sir Baldwin Walker and Sir Richard
Bromley were members, but their recommendation
has not been carried out.
lII.—THE BEST MODE OF KEEPING THE ACCOUNTS.
14. The system of accounts is elaborate and mi-
nute, but, so far as we can judge, its results are not
to be relied upon for any practical purpose.
15. An account of the expenditure of the dock-
yards has been kept in various forms for many
years. In 1848 the Committee of Revision recom-
mended that the annual accounts No. 88 and No.
89, which profess to give the expenditure on ' yard
services' and ships' respectively, should be made
up monthly.
The Admiralty Board Order of 1849, to give effect
to this recommendation, appears to have been
obeyed for a short time, but the Accountant-General
states that the monthly accounts soon fell into dis-
use. When the accountants were appointed to the
yards in 1856 they were instructed to make up the
monthly accounts, but these accounts have fre-
quently been in arrear, and when made up have been
sent to London only on one occasion—namely, in
1859, when they were asked for by the Accountant-
General of the Navy, to enable him to make up an
account of expenditure ordered by the Board of
Admiralty.
16. The annual accounts, No. 88 and No. 89 have
been sent to the office of the Surveyor (now Con-
troller) of the Navy, but no use whatever appears to
have been made of No. 88, while up to 1860 the only
use we can discover to which No. 89 has been ap-
plied has been in the compilation of the Doomsday
Book, a record which has seen kept in the Sur-
veyor's office for more than 150 years, and which
professes to give an account of the expense of build-
ing and maintaining every ship in the navy during
that period.
17. In 1860 a return, No. 174 of that session,
founded on these accounts, was presented to the
House of Commons, purporting to show the
expenditure on building, converting, repairing,
fitting, &c., the ships of your Majesty's Navy
during the nancial year 1858-59. A similar return
has just been presented for 1859.60.
18.' As a proof of the inaccuracy of the de-
tailed accounts we refer to the report of an investi-
gation into the accounts of Woolwich Dockyard.
The examiners report that they have discovered
7,906 errors in the accounts from April 1 to Nov.
30, 1860, of which 6,566 are in the rating, valuing,
and totalling of timber and store notes in the store-
keeper's department, varying in amount from ld.
to £490 ; 208 in the rating, valuing. totalling, and
proving of workmanship notes in the accountant's
department, varying in amount from ld. to £ll ;
874 in the postings, totalling them, and preparing
Returns Nos. 88 and 89, in the accountant's depart-
ment, varying in amount from ld. to £400; 71 in
the postings and totalling of factory portion of
Returns Nos. 88 and 89 in the chief engineer's
department, varying in amount from ld. to £4 9s. ;
and 187 in the postings and totalling of Return
No. 8, in the storekeeper's department, varying in
amount from ls. 6d. to £365 It appears from
the same document that a sum of £4,480 for engines
and boilers of the Ranger was omitted to be entered
into the monthly return for May; and that a sum
frorr. £l,OOO to £1,200 per annum, for the time of
certain workmen, was charged twice from the 2st
of April, 1858.
19. A subsequent report to the Admiralty from
Commodore Drummond, who suggested the original
investigation, shows that a sum of £5,210 for ex-
penses incurred in the factory department was
omitted to be charged against the Weser, in the
annual Return No. 89 for 1859-60.
20. While recommending that an inquiry similar
to that just finished at Woolwich should be insti-
tuted in the other dockyards, we think it right to
state that we attribute the errors in this account
to the complex and elaborate system, the incon-
venient printed forms on which the accounts are
kept, and the fact that the accounts were seldom
used for any practical purpose.
21. The accounts of the steam factories profess to
give the cost price of the articles supplied to your
Majesty's ships. We find, however, that they are
made to balance by an entry under the head of
general expenditure, which is in fact the difference
between the valuation of the work done and the
materials and wages charged against the factory.
No charge whatever is made for interest on buildings
or plant, or for the supervision of the principal
officers.
22. This system of accounts encourages a belief
on the part of the officers of -the dockyard, which
is communicated to the Board of Admiralty, that

4. Steam machinery.
5. Coals.

the steam factories in the dockyards can produce
articles at a cheaper rate than private establish-
ments. This belief has, in our opinion, tended to a
greater extension of the factory system than was
requisite to render 'them efficient as repairing
establishments ; and if these accounts are not placed
at once upon a proper footing, we fear that this
erroneous system will be still further extended.
23. In all the other manufacturing establish-
ments, such as the smitheries, foundries, metal-
mills, mast, boat, and capstan houses, roperies, sail
and colour lofts, the joiners' and plumbers' shops,
&c. (with the exception of the conversion of tim-
ber), the net cost of the articles manufactured is
increased by the share of general expenditure, as
is done in the factory accounts ; but in addition to
this 10 per cent. is added to cover wear and tear of
machinery, use of buildings, and supervision.
24. The Storekeeper-General states that in some
of the manufactures the cost of the machinery and
es
ah in
onwntaohhdpt aesarthemi
ecnvaoetsouhrennesi
etrs
tocofooro
pmr:
therefore does
drid
opcoseeceernasstene.
eusoninst dt.aeomrr
fair
at
believehya ne
bayhen
teuhohaniudandntgoet of plant
likehpt heal aenndmi t t dp:roe
manu-
facturing accounts show less than the cost of the
manufactures of the dockyards.
25/ With regard to the conversion of timber,
the evidence leads us to believe that the rate-book
price of converted timber charged to the ship or
service is much too low, and that it does not
cover even those charges for incidental ex-
penses connected with landing, surveying, re-
ceiving, carting, stacking, removing to pits or saw-
mills, wages paid to attendant converters, sawyers,
ares, usedpp supposed
writers, reducers, and issuers, and share of general
expenditure for cost of pettystores,llwhich u
&c.
the saw-pit and sawmills,,, a
to be included in it, still less the cost of repairing
and maintaining the buildings and machinery con-
nected with its conversion.
26. It may be observed that although there has
been an Accountant-General of the Navy since, 1832,
the expense accounts of the dockyards have never
been placed under his control, notwithstanding the
fact that the most experienced accountants who
have examined this question have recommended
this improvement.

27. The cash accounts of the dockyards are made
up by the accountant of the yard, and are under
the control of the Accountant-General.

28. The store accounts as regards quantities are
made up by the storekeeper of the yard, examined
in the office of the superintendent, and are under
the control of the Storekeeper-General.
29. The valuation of the store notes is done in
the office of the storekeeper, but is not checked in
any other department.
30. The expense ledgers, which are the basis of
the Returns No. 88 and No. 89, are made up by the
accouaccountant from the workmanship notes, and from
the
Untrue
'o4.n. and return notes of stores after they have
rated and veined by the storekeeper. The
practice is, and
al has been, to send these ac-