The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-01 00:00:00

TIE SUN,- LONDON, _THURSDAY ETENING, AUGUST

• noble ornament to the metropolis of the British empire,
but we are not quite sure that this consideration has not
been rather injurious than beneficial to the project.
The public is so fir utilitarian, as to think that
" the game ought to be worth the candle," and that
ornaments may be bought too dear. Accustomed,
therefore, to look upon the proposed embankment.
as an ornament, and as an ornament only, though to
be bought at a high price, they turn coldly from it.
This would be our own feeling too if we had not to
" make the journey," as the French happily describe
such laird work, of Fleet-street and the Strand, as often
as we have to make it, and to run the risk which every
one must run in crossing these perilous thoroughfares
some half-dozen times a-day. This disagreeable expe-
rience has convinced us, as it must convince every one
who will prove it, that some additional means of com-
munication between the centre of the City and West-
minster is a matter about which there can be no longer
an option. The grand duct, which might have
served very well for a population of a million, will
not serve for a population of about two millions, with
a traffic increased fivefold, to say nothing of the feli-
citous introduction of those most lumbering of all
impediments, omnibuses. In short, a new thorough-
fare, continuing the line of Thames-street to West-
minster, it already indispensable to the safety,
not to say comfort, of all the pedestrians of
the metropolis, and every addition to the ex-
tent, population, and trade of this huge city
makes the want of this additional thoroughfare more
intolerable. The only question then that can be raised
is, where this new thoroughfare is to be situated ?
Within the river bank it cannot be placed without cut-
ting through, besides some thousands probably of other
expensive houses, the Inner Temple, the Middle Tem-
ple, King's College, Somerset-house, the Savoy, the Adel-
phi, Hungerford-market, Whitehall-place, Whitehall-
gardens, Richmond-terrace, with the magnificent resi-
dences of the Duke of Buccleuch and others. The bare
purchase of the ground for this line would probably
cost as much as the erection of a terrace upon arches
from Blackfriars to Westminster twice told. Yet be-
tween such an enormously expensive street as we have
suggested and Lord Lincoln's proposition there is really
no choice, for, we. repeat it, the second thorough.
fare is perfectly indispensable. An objection has
been raised, that the masonry to support the pro-
iiosed terrace would displace so much of the tide
water as to render less rapid the current of the river.
We should think that this would be scarcely an objection,
if, as the report on Westminster-bridge states, the current
has become so rapid since the removal of old London-
' bridge, as to deepen the channel seven feet, between
Westrnistzga Blackfriars, and to undermine the founda-
tions of all the older bridges and all the buildings whose
foundations are on the river's banks. But suppose any
mischief to arise from the displacement of the water,
that may be very easily remedied by finding a new place
for water on the Surrey side, or by deepening the frontage
on the Middlesex bank ; but, in truth, we believe this
fear to be perfectly groundless. Whatever, happens,
we must have the thoroughfare, and the sooner the
better.

SUMMER ASSIZES.
HOME CIRCUI T.—Lewes, July 30.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron PA.RKE

Georrge Marchant, a person respectably connected,
and who carries on the business of a wine-merchant, at
Brighton, surrendered in discharge of his rocognizances
to answer an indictment, alleging that he had feloniously
stolen a quantity of tame pheasants and partridges, the
property of the Right Hon. Thomas, Earl of Chichester.
Mr. Johnson conducted the prosecution, and Messrs.
Clarkson and Creasy appeared for the defence.
From the evidence adduced it seems that the noble

prosecutor had a number of young pheasants and
partridges that had been reared by a hen, under the
charge of his gamekeeper, at Stanmer Park, and
on the 9th July, twenty•eight pheasants and fourteen
partridges were missed. Shortly afterwards, in conse-
quence of some information that was received, a Brighton
constable, named White, went to Marchant's premises,
and the servant showed him several young pheasants
and partridges. A warrant was then obtained, and the
birds were taken away, and on the prisoner being
asked to account for the possession of them, he said
he had bought some " small stuff" of a man who came
to his house, and that he gave half-a-crown for them.
The prisoner, it appeared, had been originally colu-
mned by the Brighton magistrates for receiving the bird.
feloniously, but that charge was abandoned, and he was
indicted for stealing them. The evidence of identity was,
however, very weak, and there was very little testimony
to support either charge.
At the close of the case for the prosecution Mr. Baron
PARKE contended that there was no evidence to go to the
jury, and a verdict of Not Guilty was accordingly
recorded.

CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron GURNEY and a
Common Jury.) •
PARRY V. NICHOLSON.
_

This was an action upon a bill of exchange for 2501.,
accepted by the defendant. The pleas set up on behalf
of the defendant were that no consideration had been
given for the bill, and there were other pleas to the
effect that it was a forgery.
Mr. Sergeant Channell and Mr. Peacock appeared for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Platt and Mr. Clarkson were for the
defendant.

The case in itself possessed very little matter of in-
terest to the public, but there were a few disclosures re-
lative to discounting and bill transactions which deserve
notice. It did not appear that any consideration had
been given to the defendant for the acceptance in question,
but it was endorsed by the party who received it to the
plaintiff, who is an attorney in London. There had
been other bill transactions in connection with the case,
and one of the witnesses said that a bill for 60/., at two
months, had been discounted, and 10/. more charged as
interest. In cross •examination by Mr. Platt, he said
that it was customary in discounting transactions to take
from three per cent. upwards, and that the generality of
the bills that were brought to be discounted were not
worth the stamp they were written on. There was some
appearance presented on the face of the bill that the date
had been altered as well as the amount ; and Mr. Platt,
in his address to the jury, contended that, under all the
circumstances, the defendant was entitled to a verdict.

The jury retired to consider the case, and upon their
return gave a verdict for the defendant.
Mr. PLATT subsequently applied to have the bill im-
pounded, as it was probable other proceedings might be
taken.

Sergeant CHANNELL expressed his opinion that there
were no grounds to justify the proceeding. There was
no evidence of any forgery having been committed.
Mr. Baron GURNEY said he should give no opinion
upon the facts. The only question was, whether there
would be any objection to have the bill placed in the
hands of the Court to insure its production in case it
should be required. His Lordship added, that there did
not appear to be any imputation upon the character of
the plaintiff in the present action.
Mr. PLATT said he did not intend to impute any mis-
conduct to the plaintiff. His only object was to secure
the production of the document at a future period.
The attorney for the plaintiff said be had no objec-
tion to the bill being impounded.
Mr. Baron GURNEY said as that was the case there
was no difficulty, and he directed that the bill should re-
main in the custody of the officers of the Court.

MORTALITY in the METROPOLIS.
The following are the results of "A Table of Mortality
in the Metropolis, showing the Number of Deaths from
all Causes registered in the Week ending Saturday, the
27th of July, 1844." The Table is issued from the Office
of the Registrar-General:—

Weekly

CAUSES OF DEATH.

Total. Average of
e years.
Epidemic, Endemic, and Contagious Diseases 289 Five
178
Diseases of variable or uncertain seat lOB 111
Diseases of the Brain, Nerves, and Senses 207 157
Diseases of the Lungs, and other Organs of
Respiration
Diseases of the Heart and Blood-vessels 3O 21
Diseases of the Stomach, Liver, and other
Organs of Digestion ' 107 69
Diseases of the Kidneys, &c 8 5
Childbirth, Diseases of the Uterus, &c. lO 10
Diseases of the Joints, Bones, and Muscles 4 6
Diseases of the Skin, &c.
Old Age, or Natural Decay 53 71
By Violence, Privation, or Intemperance
Causes specified 1064 942
Deaths from all Causes ...... 1066 946
DEATHS FROIS THE PRINCIPAL DISEASES INCLUDED UNDER 1

openitig of—thc election,- urged upon all present to
be active in pressing the distinctive claims of
the new Charity upon the notice of the true
friends of the orphan in the City of London and
throughout the country, feeling persuaded, as he
did, that the public required but to be aware of facts, To
induce them to support so worthy and righteous a cause.
Dr.: Reed announced the names of the five success-
ful candidates, one of whom had come in under peculiar
circumstances, having been withdrawn from another
charity, voluntarily throwing up 8,000 votes upon con-
scientious principlQs. Votes of thanks having been
passed to the Lord Mayor, Lord Dudley Stuart, David
Salomons, Esq., and others, the meeting was dissolved.

derived from a Mr. Lukin, a gentleman holding some
situation in the War-office. He happened to be in the
country when Captain Warner was testing the powers
of his invention. He inquired into it, and con-
sidered it of so much imp•alance that he reported
it to Sir Herbert Taylar. .vh laid the eiraumstances
before his late Majesty, King William IV. That re-
vered Monarch, who yielded to no man in his attachment
to the maritime interests of this country, at once con-
ceived the idea of the vast importance of the invention.
After a great deal of personal investigation he thought
it right to consult an officer of great eminence, Sir
Richard Keates--a mall whose distinguished ser-
vices were well-known to that House and
the country. That officer was deputed by his
Majesty to inquire more fully into the subject, and his
investigation lasted nearly through a course of two
years. He was given to understand that his reports
had given the strongest possible opinion that
this invention ought to be secured to the country;
that it ought to be in the hands of the Prime
Minister—(A laugh)—whenever the circumstances of
the country might require it, and that all the world
should know that the Government of this country was
in possession of such a power. The opinion of Sir
Thomas Hardy, whose name could not be mentioned
by any one connected with the navy, but with
extreme respect, was taken on the subject.
He considered it was most unfortunate for the country
that the reports of those two officers should be mislaid.
What had become of them he could not say; but this he
knew, that they existed at one time. He presumed that the
Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, who was then First Lord of the Admiralty,
would have no objection to state whether any report had
been made to him on the subject. With respect to the
magnitude of' the invention, he contended, that because it
was extraordinary it was not to be supposed to be the
result of the brain of a visionary. Thirty years ago, to
talk of gas would be considered madness, and years
before that the inventor of gunpowder had been looked
upon as an impostor. Much reproach had been cast
upon Captain Warner on the ground that he never car-
ried out what he proposed. The Noble Lord then pro-
ceeded to defend the course that had been pursued by
Captain Warner during the administration of Lord Mel-
bourne, and observed that when the subject was re-
ferred to Lieutenant Webster, who made a report,
it was treated with contempt at the Admiralty.
lie considered this was a most unwarrantable breach of
confidence ; at all events, it was a most improper way
of treating a confidential communication. The report
of Lieutenant Webster corroborated in every particular
the reports which had been made by Sir Richard Keates
and Sir Thomas Hardy. That report w at6d by
some persons with derision, and by others ft was stated
that Captain Warner and Lieutenant "Webster were in
collusion. He denied that such was the case. Lieutenant
Webster had made that report like an honest man, who
was anxious to do his duty-to his country. Then an in-
sinuation was made that Lieutenant Webster was insane,
and the same thing was; said of Sir Richard Keates. It
was said that Sir Richard Keates was in his dotage, and
that Sir Thomas Hardy had yielded up his opinion to
that of Sir Richard Keates, on account of their long
habits of personal intimacy, and from the personal re-
spct which he bore him. Now, who that knew the
high and honourable character of Sir Thomas Hardy
could for one moment imagine that he would make such
a report if he did not believe it to be correct ?—(Hear,
hear.) Lieutenant Webster's report had been presented
to the Admiralty on the 16th of September, 1839. Lord
Melbourne had frequently gone and sent to the Ad-
miralty for that report, but had never been able to ob-
tain it. In January, 1840, it was suggested that the
Board of Ordnance should be consulted on the subject.
Sir Hussey Vivian, who was at the time at the head of
that Board, treated the whole matter with ridicule ; he
said he was incompetent to decide on the subject, but
that if he were called on to give his private opinion, he
would do so. He (Lord Ingestre) bad called on Sir
Hussey Vivian on the subject, and it was evident that
Sir Hussey Vivian thought that Capt Warner was mad,
and that he (Lord Ingestre) was very little different. Ile
himself, however, had not as yet discovered such to
he the case, although he must confess he enter-
tained strong impressions upon this subject. He would
now read to the House a letter which Captain Warner
had addressed to the Hon. Member for Hertford (Mr.
Cowper) on this subject, the lion. Gentleman at that
time holding the situation of private secretary to Lord
Melbourne. (The Noble Lord here read the letter al-
luded to, which was dated Feb. 3, 1840, and in which
Captain Warner, after describing the various reports
which had been made on the subject of his invention by
Sir Richard Keates, Sir Thomas Hardy, and Lieut.
Webster, and stating that in his opinion the knowledge
of the secret should be confined to the inventor, the
Prime Minister, and the Sovereign, observed with re-
gard to the proposal, that the invention should be sub-
mitted to Sir Hussey Vivian—that if Sir Hussey Vivian's
deciion was to be final, he would not object to commu-
nicate to him, in the presence of Lieutenant Webster,
that portion of the invention which related to the land
service.) Finding matters in that state, he (Lord In-
gestre), being convinced that the matter was worthy of
investigation, had waited on Lord Melbourne on the
subject, and had stated his willingness, although politi-
cally opposed to Lord Melbourne's Government, to afford
the Government every assistance in investigating the
matter, and he besought his Lordship not to suffer that
which might be of great importance to be turned into
ridicule. He was sure Lord Melbourne attached im-
portance to the matter, or he would not have allowed
him (Lord Ingestre) to tease him so on the subject ; he
would have found some means of getting rid of him,
or have said that he would have nothing to do with the
matter. He tried in vain to procure for Captain Warner
an opportunity of testing his invention. He was re-
ferred from one to another until he became tired. He
then suggested to Captain Warner that he should try
an experiment on a small scale, and undertook to re-
quest the attendance of one or two officers of distinction
to witness it. He requested the attendance of Lord
Hardwicke, and of the Hon. and Gallant Admiral, the
Member for Ripon, who was not at that time in Parlia-
ment. On the 28th of July, 1840. an experiment on a
small scale was made at Wanst,ad, and no person who
witnessed it could doubt its efficacy ; and Admiral Cock-
burn recommended Captain Warner to apply to the Go-
vernment, which he again did, but unsuccessfully. The
invention possessed, as well as extraordinary power,
great applicability. His demands on the Government
were always postponed. In February, 1841, another ex-
periment was made at the instance of Sir Francis Bur-
dett, and before a large number of men of rank and
station. Sir Henry Hardinge, Sir George Murray, and
his Right Hon. Friend, were present ; it, too, was per-
fectly successful. In September, 1841, he waited on Sir
Robert Peel, who gave him a very courteous answer,
and promised not to let the matter drop. It was far
from his wish to attack the Government, but he thought
it an unfortunate thing thatquestions of this sort should
be frittered away in their progress from one department
to another. Sir Robert Peel referred the matter to Sir
George Murray, who proposed certain terms, to which
Captain Warner assented. The Gallant Officer then
read the document containing the views of Sir G. Murray
relative to Capt. Warner's invention. There were three
points to be attended to—first, its power—secondly,
the degree of safety and facility with which it, could be
applied to useful purposes, naval and military—thirdly,
the danger of Foreign Powers becoming possessed of
the secret, in case the Government of Great Britain ne-
glected it. The document did full justice to the expen-
diture of time, money, and mental energy, on the experi-
ment of Captain Warner, and-set forth that the Govern-
ment were willing to make a certain pecuniary advance.
Subsequently a Commission was appointed consisting of
Sir Edward Owen, Sir Howard Douglas, and Sir Byam
Martin ; the latter officer, however, could not attend on
the Commission, and Capt. Warner requested that Lord
Ingestre or Lord Hardwicke might be appointed in his
stead. It had been said that Captain Warner had asked
400,0001. for his invention, but this was a mis-
take. A Gallant General (Sir Howard Douglas)
said he could perform himself an experiment
similar to that which Captain Warner performed
at Brighton, but this he (Lord Ingestre) did not
believe. The Gallant General had frequently thrown out

sarcasms upon Capt. Warner's experiment, such as that
he did not want to see a punt in a fish-pond, and such
like taunts.—(Laughter.) He did not think it was
proper that any member of the Commission should, be-
fore the day of trial arrived, throw out any such taunts
or inuendoes. Nothing could be fairer than the pro-
posals made by Captain Warner. He proposed to com-
municate his invention provided the Premier would un-
dertake to obtaidcompensation for him from the Parlia-
ment ; and he declared that he would not expect or
receive a farthing if his experiment did not prove en-
tirely successful, and every way answer the purpose for
which it was designed. It was said that the experiment
at Brighton had not been effected by the means Captain
Warner had proposed ; but he (Lord Ingestre) thought
nothing could be more complete, and there was not the
slightest appearance of the explosion having been
produced by gunpowder.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The subject of Captain Warner's invention etas subse-
quently referred to a second Commission. That Com-
mission called on Captain Warner to make out an esti-
mate of the probable expense of a trial of his experi-
ments, and he did so, estimating it at 2,500/. This sum
was to purchase the hulk of a vessel, and to provide the
use of a steamer for a period of a month. A long cor-
respondence then ensued between Captain Warner and
the Commissioners, and the result was that Captain
Warner was offered 5001 to carry out his experiments.
Tis, of course, Captain Warner refused, and then the
negotiation dropped. He (Lord Ingestre) contended
that Captain Warner had never shrunk from any oppor-
tunity of making his experiments. Although he had
originally demanded 400,0001. for his two inventions,
yet he afterwards consented to abide by any decision the
Government might think proper to come to with respect
to his remuneration. He had done all he could to have
his invention fairly tested ; and he (Lord Ingestre)
thought that great praise was due to Mr. Soames, the
eminent ship-owner, for having afforded the means
for the late trial at Brighton. That gentleman looked
upon this matter as a subject of great importance to
the country, and he said, " although the Government
will not furnish the means of testing it, I will."
He (Lord Ingestre) took that opportunity of
expressing his approbation of the public spirit which
had induced that gentleman to make such a sacri-
fice.—(Cheers.) The experiment at Brighton needed
very little description from him (Lord Ingestre), as it
had been sufficiently detailed in all the newspapers. No
one could doubt the terrific explosive power that was
there used. He was prepared to state that those expe-
riments could be repeated in every variety of form, and
at all times of the tide. It had become a fashion to ridi-
cule the importance of the invisible shell. It was said,
let us have nothing to do with the invisible shell—give
us the long range. He had no doubt, if a vessel were
to be placed outside of either of the harbours of Toulon
or Spithead, that by means of the invisible shell it would
be impossible for any ship to escape destruction coming
out of either of_these harbours. Suppose we ware to
be at war with France—which God forbid—the French
might send a fleet to anchor ofißrighton, and that town

might be laid in ashes in a few hours. Now, by this in..
vention of Captain Warner's, a hostile fleet could
be prevented from coming within several miles
of any shore. He (Lard Ingestre) had only
now to beg pardon of the House for having occupied
their time so long, but he had felt strongly on this sub-
ject. He had brought it forward from a sacred sense
of duty, and he trusted the House would give him cre-
dit for having been actuated by no other motives.—
(Cheers.) The Noble Lord concluded by moving for
the correspondence which .had taken place between her
Majesty's Government and Captain Warner, on the sub-
ject of Capt. Warner's invention.
Sir R, PEEL—Sir, I rise for the purpose of seconding
the motion of my Noble Friend, for I am determined at
length that the public shall be in possession of the cor-
respondence respecting Captain Warner's invention, and
they will then be enabled to judge what were the rea-
sons, after that correspondence, which I hold in my
hand, had taken place, that Captain Warner was not in-
vited to exhibit his invention before professional men
calculated to judge of its merits. My Noble Friend re-
presents Captain Warner as being placed under circum-
stances analogous to those in which the inventor of
gunpowder was placed—namely, of being treated with
ridicule, and that there was a wish on the
part of her Majesty's Government to deprive
him of the opportunity of bringing his alleged invention
to a true test. Now I wish this use and the public to
be enabled to judge whether that is a correct representa-
tion or nor, and whether her Majesty's Government have
not given to Captain Warner every opportunity which
Captain Warner could expect, consistent with that pre-
caution which I think every one will admit that her Ma-
jesty's Government should observe in a matter of this
kind. I will make no reference whatever to what took
place between Captain Warner and her Majesty's Go-
vernment, previously to my accession to office, and my
personal knowledge of Captain Warner's proposal ; but
I am bound to say, from what I have seen of the previous
correspondence, and after my experience of the proposal
of Captain Warner, I do not believe, that her Majesty's
late Government did treat with Captain Warner in any
other manner than the present Government has treated
him. Ido not believe that they refused Captain Warner
the opportunity of exhibiting the effect of his invention.
Those connected with that Government, however, can
speak upon that point with greater confidence and autho-
rity than myself. I may observe, in passing, that it is
totally beside the question to instance any opinion that
King William might have expressed. Those who are
officially responsible must judge for themselves as to the
merits of a subject respecting which they would have
to submit to Parliament the consideration of voting
public money. My Noble Friend stated accurately that
in 1841, shortly after the accession of the Government to
office, Captain Warner's proposal was renewed. Captain
Warner stated that he was in possession of two instru-
ments of most destructive power ; one called the invisi-
ble shell, and the other called the long range. A speci-
men of the power of the invisible shell was given the
other day at Brighton. I had an opportunity of wit-
nessing an experiment on a smaller scale in a pound at
Wanstead, and I admit that the destructive power or the
instrument applied to the vessel I saw destroyed was
most formidable. I saw nothing whatever of the pre-
vious preparations. I saw a vessel blown up into the air
as completely as if ten barrels of gunpowder had been
placed in it. That I certainly saw. I was told that it
was blown up by an invisible shell brought under the
bow of the vessel. I had no op2ortunity of examining
any part of the vessel. I had no doubt that the vessel
was destroyed in the manner stated. The invisible
shell however always appeared to me to be a matter of
much less importance than the long range. I think
Captain Warner professed to be in possession of a pro-
jectile which possessed great power, which would enable
him to destroy fleets and towns at any distance varying
from one mile to six. lam glad that my Noble Friend
has relieved me from all reserve on this subject. My
Noble Friend has appeared as the advocate of Captain
Warner, and I have no objection whatever to the pro-
duction of these documents. He moved for the corre-
spondence, and I will give him as much of the corre-
spondence as will fully establish the relations between
Captain Warner and the Government. My Noble Friend
felt himself justified in referring to the correspondence of
Captain Warner, and I will avail myself of the same ad-
vantage ; referring, however, to nothing which it is not
my intention to produce. I mean to withhold nothing
which will enable this House to judge of the course
which her Majesty's Government has pursued. Captain
Warner stated that he was in possession of this projectile
called the long range. I will give his own account
of it. He said, "It has a most destructive power, and its
operation can be carried on with rapidity. I could bring
it to bear on Gibraltar, and in a few hours not a man
should be left alive. I could in the highest sea, with my
long range, destroy a large fleet. I could demolish
Algiers—instead of damaging it only, as Lord Exmouth
did with his splendid fleet—with a single vessel ; and
after having demolished Algiers, I could, with a com-
paratively trifling refit, undertake to destroy Toulon."
Now a person in possession of such wonderful powers,
ought not, on account of the apparent impossibility of
the thing, to be set aside. I will treat Captain Warner
on an assumption that all he says is true ; but this I will
not do—l will not undertake to pledge myself to the pay-
ment of a large sum of money, on account of certain
things having been done. I will do this—l will appoint
the most efficient professional men the country can fur-
nish, two or three from each department. I will not require
Capt. Warner to reveal his secret, but only to satisfy those
gentlemen of its mode of operation ; they must be per-
fectly satisfied that all this can be done, and they must
then make a report to the Government, or to me per-
sonally, if Captain Warner does not wish his plan to go
further. This report must be on the following points: first
as to the means of applying the inventions under adverse
circumstances, both of wind and tide ; then as to possi-
bility of making use of it with safety and security by
those who are possessed of it ; then, as to how long it is
probable the Government would remain in possession of
it after purchasing it. Having received a communica-
tion of this kind on these points, from these authorities,
I shall reserve to myself the power of determining
finally on the question. I do not want to know the
secret, but I want to be assured as to how far it can be
used with safety, and as to how long the Government
could retain it, having purchased it, either for the pur-
pose of applyinz it, or suppressing it altogether. All this
I want to know, but I will not enter into a
blind engagement of the kind wished by my
Noble Friend, that supposing a ship is blown
up off the pier at Brighton, Captain Warner
is to receive several thousand pounds for effecting it. I
will do no such thing, and whatever debates may take
place in this House on the subject I will not agree to it.
On receiving this communication from my Noble Friend,
I wrote to the Master-General of the Ordnance,) and
desired him to communicate with the Admiralty Board
as to the selection of two gentlemen from their respec-
tive departments for the purpose of forming a commis-
sion. Two officers of high professional character and
personal honour were selected, Sir Thos. Hastings and
Colonel Pasley. Captain Warner objected to both of
them. I said, " Very good, I think-the objection an un-
reasonable one, but that shall not prevent a fair trial of
the experiment." Two other gentlemen were then se-
lected, Sir Howard Douglas and Sir Edward Owen. Sir
Edward Owen was shortly afterwards appointed to a
command in the Mediterranean, and Sir Byam Martin
was chosen to fill his place, and to act with Sir Howard
Douglas. Now, I ask whether it would have been pos-
sible to commit the experiment to two authorities more
competent to investigate and decide upon it ? I will read
to the House the first communication these gentlemen
made to Captain Warner, and I ask whether it was
possible to enter into an inquiry with fairer justice
or more liberal spirit. The Right Hon. Gentleman
then read the letter, in which the Commissioners stated
that they were required, in the first instance, to ascer-
tain the expense of making the experiment ; that they
proposed to take first the experiment of th powers of
the long range, and then of the practical effect of the
invisible shell ; that, in both instances, the materials
would be prepared on the scale that would be necessary
for real service ; that they proposed to repeat the trial
of the long range six times, and that of the invisible
shell three times ; they requested to know what cannon
or artillery he would require from the Board of Ord-
nance, and if he should want the assistance of any men.
In order to ensure greater secresy, they offered to let
him select his own locality, in the most unfrequented
part of the country, that would present facilities for
forwarding the experiment. The House will see that I
departed from the rule generally observed in these
cases—that those who have professed to have made
discoveries of this kind shall try them in the first
instance at their own expense. If that rule was not
enforced, why, the establishment of the Board of Ord-
nance would not be sufficient to attend to the demands
that would be made on it. This very day I have received
no less than four proposals, invited probably by the dis-
cussion which has taken place on that of Capt. Warner's
—four persons who have invented instruments each at
least as destructive as Capt. Warner's.—(Hear, hear,'and
laughter.) The inventors ask for no remuneration,
but only that the experiment should be performed
at the public expense. But after the speeches that had
been made in this House on the subject, and an exhibi
tion by Captain Warner, I must admit of considerable
power, I thought I would deprive him of any opportu-
nity of saying I treated the invention with any disre-
spect or ridicule; I therefore offered to bear the ex-
penses of the experiment within reasonable limits.
Captain Warner in his reply said, he did not want any
artillery or cannon, as he effected his object by means
distinct from any of the weapons of war. But with re-
gard to the reversal of the order of the experiments, by
taking the long range first, he did not think it right to
depart from the original plan. But he submitted to the
Commissioners whether all expense in the matter might
not be avoided, as he could refer for the success of his
experiment to the high authority of the Secretary
of the Admiralty, the First Lord of the Treasury,
to the Master-General of the Ordnance, and to his
Noble Friend Lord Ingestre. Why, I never
saw any experiment with the long range. I only saw
the one experiment at Wanstead, and what is the use of
referring at all to first Lords of the Treasury ? I pro-
pose myself to be quite incapable of judging on the sub-
ject, and what I want is the opinion and judgment of
professional men. In reply to this letter of Captain
Warner's, the Commissioners returned a very proper
communication, stating that they were not appointed to be
referred to the opinions of others, but to judge for them-
selves. Then, as to the point of the expense of purchasing
the invention, in case it succeeded. The Noble Lord says,
I made a great mis-statement last year in asserting that
Captain Warner asked 400,000 L for his secret. I hold
in my hand a letter from Captain Warner to Lord Hard-
wicke, in which he demands for the purchase of his in-
visible shells, 200,0001., and 200,0004 for his long range
also. That was the proposal made by Captain Warner
on the 2d of November, 1841, immediately after the
proposal for the appointment of a Commission, and his
consent to the nomination of Sir Byam Martin.
The Commissioners asked Capt. Warner to proceed with
the experiments, and they received a reply on the 20th
of April, 1842. In this letter Capt. Warner acknow-
ledges the communication of the Commissioners of the

16th, b,tt states that as they said they had no authority
to fix th, amount of his remuneration in case he suc-
ceeded, and as this was the basis of his engagement,- he
could not proceed further till they received authority to
proini:-e him, on the part of the Government, a proper
amount of remuneration. He said further, that he might
save them any unnecessary trouble in entering on any
other part of the subject till . this obstacle was re:.
moved. Thus it is evident that the sum of 400,000/
was required, upon which the Commissioners informed
him that there was an end of the Commission, since they
had no authority to promise any such sum, or any other
sum beforehand ; that this must be left entirely to her
Majesty's Government, and they closed the Commission.
After these gentlemen had thrown up the Commission,
Captain Warner said he should he content with any re-
muneration the First Lord of the Treasury might offer
him beforehand. He did also submit to some examina-
tion by these Commissioners, and he thought a refe-
rence to some of the questions put to Captain Warner,
and the answers given to them would satisfy the House
that caution on every point was not misplaced. The
following questions were put to Captain Warner :-110n;
long is it since you satisfied yourself of the powers 0'
your long range, and your invisible shells ? Captain
Warner replies—Twelve years ago with respect to the
long range, and twenty-seven years ago with regard to
the invisible shells, as he sunk two French privateers at
the end of the war, one off Folkestone, and the other in
St. Vallery Bay. What was the name of the vessel you
were on board of ? The Nautilus. Such an extraordi-•
nary circumstance was, of course, reported to the Admi-
ralty ? No ;it was not reported ; we were not under
the Admiralty. Then, who was the Nautilus hired by ?
It was hired by the Secretary of State, and employed by
Lord Castlereagh in landing spies on the coast of France.
Was the destruction of these two vessels reported to the
Secretary of State ? It might have been, but Ido not
know. Was it recorded in the log-book of the Nautilus?
We did not keep a log-book. Were any of the crew
present when the destruction took place ? No one knew
of it but myself and another. In answer to other ques-
tions, Captain Warner stated that no head-money was
claimed for the crew destroyed, and that his father was
the owner of the Nautilus. The Commissioners sent to
the Admiralty to inquire if any record whatever existed,
or cerrespondence, relating to the destruction of these
two French privateers, and none could be found. The
same inquiries were then made at the Foreign-office, but
no record of any such fact existed. The Commissioners
then asked where was the long range tried. ? The an-
swer was, upon some trees, at the distance of three
miles, in Hainault forest, in the presence of
Sir Edward Keats. Now, if this were the
case, why should not Captain Warner satisfy
the Commissioners as to the mode in which it was ac-
complished? The Commissioners also say, You have par-
ticularly spoken of the desolating power of your long
range ; it so, how did you obtain a proof of it ? Car
tain Warner in reply, stated that he had tried it in
Hainault forest. and on the Biom islands, where there
were no buildings, but where the power of the instru-
ment shivered several tons of rock. Now other persons
could produce as ;neat effects as this. There were many
chemical compounds that produced the most violent et-
feet.;, yet might be handled with perfect safety ; but the
question was, whether it could be applied under difficult
circumstances, and whether they could be applied with
safety by the persons using them. We therefore do not
see such advantage in blowing a vessel into the
air, others can do that. So much for the in'
visible shell. But, above all, they had a curiosity
to see the effects of the long range—a projectile able W
destroy fort and towns. If they attached a shell to the
tail of a kite, or to a balloon, that would be of no impor-
tance—there was no ingenuity in that. If they proposed
to convey it in this manner, and drop it into a fortress
—that would be useless, for it would be impossible so to
do. But could they project it to the same distance? Let
them show that that was possible. However the experi-
ments came to an untimely end, and before he closed the
Commission, his Gallant Friend (Sir Byam Martin), ex"
pressed a wish that he might never be asked to try anY.
more experiments, and that if he were asked he should
positively decline. A debate subsequently took place in
that House, and Captain Warner published a letter 00
the subject, not very complimentary to the Government
or to the Committee. But that was no reason why be
should not have a fair opportunity of trying his experi-
ments. On hearing, therefore, that Captain Warner was
dissatisfied with the course taken, I wrote again to Sir
George Murray, stating that I understood Captain War-
ner was really desirous that the experiment should be
fairly tried, and requesting him to confer with the First
Lord of the Admiralty as to the selection of two other
officers, not of equal rank with Sir Byam Martin and,
Sir Howard Douglas, but of unblemished character, and
having every qualification to enable them to judge. On this
Commission Captain Warner wished to have a nominee
of his own placed, but this the Government declined.
The Commission, on the other hand, wrote to Captain
Warner that the Government were willing to bear the
expense, but proposed that one of the Commission should
be on board the steam-boat employed by Captain
Warner; but to this Captain Warner positively ob-
jected. They said they could not form a satisfactory
Judgment unless they were on board the steamer; but
still they would waive that objection, and they called on
him for an estimate of the expense to be incurred. I
said before I would not enter into a blind engagement to
pay hundreds of thousands of pounds; all we wanted
was, that the Commissioners should watch the mode in
which Captain Warner proceeded, and to report the re,
stilt of their observations to the Government. But in
the first instance, we wanted to have an estimate of the
expense necessary for the experiment, and a letter was
written to Captain Warner for an estimate of the ex-
pense. Captain Warner replied that he would want
2,6371. for the invisible shell, and 2,4701. for the long
range, making a sum of 5,1071. altogether. Our wish
was to see the experiment with the long range, and we
said we did not mind the invisible shell, but we wished
to have the long range tried, after what had been stated
as having been done at St. Vallery Bay, Hainault
forest, arid the Biom Island. We proposed to give
him 6001. in the first instance, and then to watch the,
progress of the experiment. Captain Warner objected
to this, saying that 500/. was not enough ; but still he
would consent to try the experiment for that sum, and
try to make up the remaining sum, which would be ii
cessary, from amongst his friends. After a certain
period, he intimated that it was impossible to make
the experiment, as he could not find friends who woulu,
bear the remaining expense. Thus the matter close('
without any experiment, and the relations between the
Government and Captain Warner ceased. We departed
from the ordinary rule in this instance of advancing the
public money to try this experiment. We wanted
have the long range tried first ; and I do not think it
would be consistent with the duty imposed on us of
guarding the public purse against all unneccessary
ponse, if we were to enter into engagements for advane'
ing a considerable sum—l will not say 400,0001., °.1.,
200,00 a or 300,000 L—depending upon a contingen°7,
which could not be foreseen.—(Hear, hear.) lam 0'
opinion that the Treasury, and all the other depart'
ments, have acted with the greatest fairness and libe.
rality towards Captain Warner ; and I hope the House
will be of the same opinion. I must say that nothing
will induce me, from the experience which I have hea
with regard to inventors, and in respect to Capt. Warner
to consent to enter into an engagement to pay eitha
400,0001., or 100,0001., upon a certain vessel being de'
stoyed.—(Hear, hear.) I will first know the mode 10
which it is destroyed. I will know the value of the dis'
covery by which it is destroyed, and the power of PIT:,
venting the use of it by others—all these effects I so')
know before I consent, on the part of the public, that
large sum of money be advanced ; and I hope that this
House will not sanction a departure from that princirde'
seeing the importance which every inventor attaches ;ci
his own invention, and that on every hand demands
would would be made on the public money on similar grouno*
(Hear, hear.) Before I sit down I must refer to some
additional evidence in this matter. In answer to a (Pee
tion which had been put to Capt. Warner as to whether
ordinary ships would answer his purpose, or whether In
would require a certain description of vessels, he said
that there should be vessels fitted for the
purpose in every fleet." They said, " The°
you propose to instruct persons in- the matt,
k.
rials you propose to employ ? This will ma"
the secret known ; and how many persons will it
La'
necessary to employ in each fleet?" He said " t
one man in the fleet should be in the secret." Thus the
Government would lose the secret unless- they gn4
400,0001. to every person who became acquainted 141'1
it, unless Captain Warner could suggest some mode °
keeping it secret which did not occur to the Commis'
sioners. This had been signified to Captain Warners
and he replied that no person need know it but the
Prime Minister and one manufacturer.—(Laughter)
Now I protest against being in the secret with anothe.r.
—(Laughter.) I don't think the secret could be in
t
worse hands than in those of the Prime Minister.
jf became necessary to prevent other Powers from w":
coming aware of it, and converting it to hostile It;
poses, and that it was a sine qua non that the see'''
should be entrusted to somebody, he thought
that that responsibility ought not to be Waft
on the Prime Minister. To the objection ti
another would divulge the secret, Captain Waril
said he did not think any Englishman would do
such thing. They replied. " You are an Englishm7f;
and you want to sell it." He said. " I want to sicelie
the secret to my country." I am sorry that my No to
Friend has imposed on me the necessity of entering 10 ,
these details. I think we have not treated Captain WI,
nor's discovery without due respect and regard. I W.l'o
entered into all these details for the purpose of showl_l
that the House of Commons is not the proper tribt7,
for trying this matter, and that it should not be colleoe,
tuted into a court of appeal from the Gorerne2 ith
Captain Warner or his offers have not been treated° or,
disrespect, and I think the House will see, from the
respondence which has passed, that Captain Warnerlii7g
had the fullest opportunity given to him of exhihi
t.
his " invisible shell" and " long range," and if Cfgthe
Warner has failed to do so, it is not the fault of be
Government or of the Commission—the fault must
ascribed to Capt. Warner, who failed to perform "
he had undertaken.—(Hear, hear.) rahle
Mr. COWPER said that the Right 110112% the
Gentleman had clearly shown to the House that
present Government had performed its dutY 111..04
gard to this matter.—(Hear, hear.) The Govern's-the
had done all that lay in their power in order that to
experiment might be fairly tried. He only wlen,
say that the late Government were not guilty of %sae
glect on their part, for that when Captain Warner Via,
his proposition to Lord Melbourne, the Noble ht
count said it was not a matter in which a s
to be called to decide, and he referred Captain ._gerxiise:
to Admiral Sir W. Parker, who was unwilling_tsilloti
mine into the question himself, and he got pertni%quire
have another Lord of the Admiralty with him tf,'„/. be-
into the matter. Captain Warner required 16,u;"per)
fore he proceeded with his test, and he (Mr_. „`,reastirt
the
remarked, Capt. Warner preferred going to
rather than to the Admiralty or Ordnance Boards,44o a
that he always treated the subject more as a cluv.
water. be
money Oulu as a scientific or military