The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-28 00:00:00

~~~k

[PRICE SD.

THE NAVY.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir,--Toe First Lord of the Admiralty, in his ex-
amination before the Committee on Salaries, told them
he had been a Lord of the Treasury, Secretary, Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, an I was now First Lord of
the Admiralty. This, it must he allowed, is tolerably
quick promotion in 17 years, five or six of which his
party were out of office.
The Committee gave as a reason for the chief
officers of state having large salaries their great talent
and experience. I never heard the present First Lord
of the Admiralty celebrated as a great financier. He
appears a very unwilling witness, and had other evi-
dence been called they would have been told so, and
certainly made the most of the duties of the Admi-
ralty ; hut I think I shall be able to show that there
is not the least necessity for so numerous a board,
though there is a great necessity for the whole con •
cern being under one roof, and that habitations may
be easily found close enough to the Admiralty to en-
able them to be at all calls.
In answer to question 2,703, the business seems
to be divided amongst the different Lords as follows :
"First Lord.—Navy estimates and finance, political
affairs, slave trade, dockyard works, patronage, and ge-
neral control.
" First Sea Lord.—Foreign navies, composition and
disposition of the fleet, sailing orders, general regula-
tions, fisheries, steam reserve, advance squadron, ap•
pointment of lieutenants, masters, pursers, mates, mid-
shipmen, and naval cadets (that is, not the appointment,
but the disposition of them), and second-masters, mas-
ters'-assistants, clerks and clerks'-assistants, boatswains,
gunners, and so forth.
" Second Sea Lord.—Superintends the department of
the Surveyor of the Navy and Steam, including ship-
building, steam machinery, repairs, defects, armaments,
inventions, &c.
" Third Sea Lord.—The discipline of the fleet, punish-
ment returns, courts-martial, Marines, marine artillery,
coast guard, rendezvous, manning the fleet and comple-
ments, boys and naval apprentices, the Excellent and
gunnery, the dockyard battalion, and the hydrographical
department.
" Fourth Sea Lord.—Department of the Storekeeper-
General, Controller of Victualling and Medical Director
General, stores, Greenwich pensioners, civil pensions,
pay, and passages, miscellaneous cases, appointment of
medical officers, foreign yards.
" The Civil Lord.—Department of the Accountant-
General, packet service, civil affairs of Greenwich Hos-
pital, dockyard schools, education, seamen's libraries,
chaplains, naval instructors, post-office, and religious in-
struction."
The public has now before them the division of la-
bour, and they have a right to fix individual respon-
sibity on each of the Lords. The First Lord, in his
distribution of patronage, will not now be able to
throw it upon the Admiralty, but must be responsible
for every app ,iotment he makes, whether good or
had, and he will be closely watched, as will be the
other Lords, in the management of their departments.
Their work upon paper appears very heavy, but they
make work for themselve., and, as Mr. Fitzroy (a
late Lord), said in the House, it is not half done, and
twenty years experience has shown that it is badly
done, and that there have been more blunders, more
waste, and more extravagance than there was when
the Navy Board, Victualling Board, Medical Board,
&e., existed. In short, what Sir G. Cockburn, Sir
G. Clerk, and Sir Byam Martin foresaw has taken
place, viz., that there would be a great want of re-
sponsibility.
I will simplify all this evidence, and show that
there might be a much better division of labenr, com-
plete responsibility at less expense, and that the du-
ties are not so arduous as stated by the First Lord. I
know it is extremely difficult to get great changes in-
troduced into the navy, so I will adhere as much as
possible to the present arrangement.
I shall begin by abolishing the Admiralty as a
political board, and appoint an admiral, with the title
of Commander- in-Chief, Admiral of Great Britain, or
whatever title the Minister chooses to give him, for
that does not signify.
He should have the whole of the patronage, and
be responsible fur its proper distribution. The com-
position, manning, distribution and discipline of the
fleet, marine and marine artillery ; I leave out the
foreign navies, which is a " humbug," and all the
other duties stated by Sir Francis Baring to swell the
duties, as they are all included in what I have stated
above. He should be assisted by a captain of the
fleet, adjutant-general of marines, a secretary and a
private secretary, and as many clerks as needful to
carry on the correspondence of the fleet.
The sinecures of vice and rear-admirals should be
abolished, and the second in command for the time
being should be the vice-admiral.
Ile should have the surveyor's and storekeeper's
department, which includes ship-building, steam
machinery, repairs, dockyard battalions and
schools, inventions, and in point of fact everything
belonging to the dockyard establishments both at home
and abroad ; contracts relative to the dockyards should
be made and signed by him, the surveyor, and the
storekeeper. He should be held responsible for the
management of this department; all the patronage,
except what was in the hands of the superintendents,
should be vested in him. He should correspond with
the superintendents, and of course be amenable to the
Commander-in-Chief.
The Rear-Admiral should superintend the victual

ing and medical department, in which is included
contracts belonging to that department, to be made
and signed by him, the medical director and con-
troller of victualling transports, convict-ships, hos-
pitals, end victualling-yards. The patronage should
be vested in him, as it is in the Vice •Admiral, and he
should be held responsible, correspond with the
superintendent, and be amenable to the Commander-
in-Chief:
The Accountant-General is a high office, and one of
great trust. It cannot be filled by a more proper
man than it is at present, and he should be held en-
tirely responsible; it would be also under the orders
of the Commander-in-Chief. The military part of
Greenwich Hospital should be intrusted to the gover-
nor, who should exiinine the men for admission, as-
sisted by the lieutenant-governor, and manage the
patronage of his department. The civil part should
be entirely under the commissioners, one of whom
should have a seat in Parliament.
The packets and post-office contracts, &c., should
return to the Postmaster. General,'and the navy should
have nothing to do with them whatever.
The Coast-guard has a controller, and he has the
Custom-house for his master, and they had much
better be allowed to look after their own affairs.
I have now provided for the management of the
navy, with the exception of the Hydrographer's- office,
which is another " humbug," and may be superin-
tended by the chief. As to politics, as we have three
Secretaries of State and a Prime Minister, I cannot see
what the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy has to do
with them. The Prime Minister and Secretaries of
Stste can send for him when they please, and give
directions when the navy is required to forward their
views, and, in point of fact, this is always done, and
their orders are forwarded to the admirals on the dif-
ferent stations to carry them into execution, and this
onght to be the especial business of one of the secre-
taries of the Admiralty, who, with the chief, should
alone be cognizant of what passes, instead of its being
known to half the clerks of the Admiralty. The chief,
as well as the secretary, should sit in Parliament, and
one or ether bring forward the estimates.
I now come to the offices, one at Whitehall and the
other at Somerset-house, and to their Lordships'
houses, two of which the Committee have recom-
mended to be given up,
In question 2,751 Mr. Bright gives the First
Lord a home thrust on the propriety of bringing all
the business under one roof.

Sir Francis admits the business would be better
done, and that an exchange is contemplated which will
bring the more essential part of the business closer to
him, but he does not think it could be conducted with
a smaller staff, except by the reduction of messengers.
How little Sir Francis must know of the constant
communication going on between the Admiralty and
Somerset-house, when he gives such evidence! I
have shown in a former letter how the business is
transacted, and 1 have no hesitation in stating that if
the whole establishment were under one roof, and if
the heads of the different departments were allowed
to attend to their own business, and if the com-
manders-in-chief on all the different stations were
not obliged to send to the Admiralty returns and
write letters on every trifle belonging to their
squadrons, you would get rid of one-half of the
Admiralty establishment; and I verily believe
the useless returns and correspondence required by
the Admiralty (though it may give them patronage)
greatly embarrass and retard the service. Now, Sir,
I should recommend that all the houses in the Admi-
ralty should be turned into public offices, and if that,
together with the contemplated exchange, be not suf-
ficient, there is a garden belonging to the Admiralty
in the Spring-garden pas,age which might be built
on, and, if that was not sufficient, one wing of the
Admiralty might be carried into the garden, which is
large enough for all purposes, and the Commander-
in-Chief and secretary could be very well accommo-
dated in Whitehall-place, directly opposite ,the Ad-
miralty. The Ordnance-office at this moment is being
enlarged on account of the inconvenience of sending
to‘the Tower for papers, and it is much easier to en-
large the Admiralty.
I now. come to the expense of the establishment.
The salaries of the Lords, the principal officers, and

SMITHFIELD MARKET.
To have one great cattle market, with slaughter-
houses,for the supply of London on the side of High-
gate-hill, is the plan proposed by the Times, in
opposition to the other which we have described. The
Highgate-hill proposal, unfortunately, solves none of
the difficulties and removes none of the inconve-
niences. The question is, are cattle to be driven to
and fro, through the streets and across the bridges ?
If they are, the removal of the actual vending place a
few miles off will obviate very few of the evils com-
plained of, whilst it will create other evils not only
tantamount, but of a nature to be more severely felt.
There can be no doubt that what would be most
desirable for the police and security of the streets, as
well as for the sanity of town-life and its abodes,
would be two cattle markets, one south-west, the other
north, at some considerable distance from tows, toge-
ther with many abattoirs or slaughtering establish-
ments in convenient vicinity to the quarters to be sup-
plied. For, as to slaughtering at Highgate all the
mutton that is to be consumed in Southwark and the
Greenwich-road, the inconvenience, loss, impractica-
bility, and increased expense, would be such as to
preclude all possibility of its being persevered in.
The double market, the many abattoirs, the prohibi-
tion against cattle passing the bridges—this is what
the public have a right to ask, and would ask, were
it possible.
But there seems to be no one who will declare that
it is feasible. The committee had admitted it not to
be so. And we must own that we do not ourselves
see how, in these days of free trade, any regulation
could be sanctioned that would make the sale and
supply of meat quite different en one side of the river
and upon the other, without that free intercommuni-
cation which would restore the level of prices.
If then the double market be impossible, if the pas-
sage of cattle over the bridges cannot be prohibited--
two conclusions which we so greatly regret that we
shall be always ready to reconsider them—if cattle
cannot be slaughtered, all of them, six or seven miles
from the place of sale, without seriously affecting
the conditions of sale or of supply, then we fear much
that the balance of advantages and inconveniences
between a great market at Highgate, one at Isling-
ton, or one more central, connected by a great street
with Islington, will prove most in favour of the latter.
We hear, indeed, a great many reasons urged in
behalf of this central market which are by no means
conclusive; such are the great and undoubted advan-
tages of the vicinity of this market and its monied
expenditure to the shops and retail trade of the City,
and the consequent loss to a number of industrious
people, were this market removed. If the public
interests demand it, however, we are not to stop for
such motives as these; although they exist as strong
reasons for not sacrificing even those interests to mere
idle and ill-calculated lore of change, productive of no
advantage whatever except to other private interests
and newer speculations.
Let us consider, for example, the scheme of the
Times. That journal has found several extensive
fields—somewhere " between Highlsztry and Horn-
sey." It has seen " the proprietor," who is anxious
to sell at the highest price Parliament will give him.
It has seen "an eminent engineer," who will convert
" 160 acres of unoccupied sloping ground" into 'any
sort of market that may be prescribed to him. " Houses
and shops, piazzas and abattoirs are naturally a part
of his design." He will build "a foreign dead meat
market and a home dead meat market," thereby rais-
ing the rent for the proprietors by forcing every
salesman to occupy two shops instead of one. He
will, of course, make " a line of railroad to connect
the river and the market ;" and, in order to avoid the
passage of cattle through the streets, he will also or-
ganize, if the public wish it, a series of air balloons to
land the sheep and oxen at each butcher's shop
throughout the City. This is the grand plan of
the " eminent engineer." The Times, of course, " has
no preference for this particular plan ;" only it thinks
that it decidedly " embraces all the required advan-
tages, and ought to have a full and fair trial." It is
a pity it omits to tell us what "the full and fair trial"
would cost, and that it does not say a single word as
to who would profit or suffer by conceding it. In-
formation upon these points would have been more
satisfactory.
Our contemporary argued yesterday that because
the Corporation see fit to defend its vested interests,
the public should take from that body the entire
control Of the cattle markets of London, and should
permit them to be vested in the hands of a company,
or of a private individual. Why, if one point more
than another has been established in connexion
with this subject, it is the utter impossibility of
properly regulating a great cattle market which
is not in the hands of some public and
responsible body. The control may be vested in the
hands of the Government, as are the cattle markets of
Paris, or it may be vested in a great corporation, like
that of London, the members of which are responsible
to the citizens at large at annual elections. But to talk
of placing in the hands of private speculators the supply
of this great metropolis with its daily food, is one of the
most monstrous proposals that could be conceived. The
Times has talked (most unwarrantably) of the proposals
of the City, as proposals which would raise the price
of meat in the metropolis. What security could the
public have for the price of meat if a private land.
owner and an engineer at Holloway were to be per-
mitted to have the cattle-markets of London entirely
in their own hands ?

Some people imagine that the markets of London
are enormously productive, and that rapid fortunes are
to be made by such extravagant projects as have been
shadowed forth. Before any unhappy speculators are led
to embark in such enterprises, we advise them cautiously
to look at the X. a. d. Suppose the 160 acres of land
" between Highbury and Hornsey" to be purchased—
suppose the market to be built thereon—suppose the
direct line of railway to the Thames to be constructed
—where, let us ask, is the dividend to come from ?
We very much fear, we must " suppose " that too.
For, at the present tolls, the annual gross revenue
derived from Smithfield. market is no more than
6,4491. a year ' • and out of that gross revenue
more than 3,0001. goes in charges for management
and of collection. How far will the 3,0001. remaining
go towards paying interest on the purchase money of
the 160 acres and dividends upon the railway shares,
and upon the cash expended in bricks and mortar,
and in the charges of the " engineer ?" It is quite
obvious that no such scheme as that proposed could
be carried out without raising the charges on the
animals brought to market, to such an unreasonable
height as to affect the price of meat.
The Highgate scheme has, in fact, not even the
practicability and promise of the Islington one. It is
unfortunately admitted that there must be a great
stream of cattle through the metropolis from north to
south, from the northern roads over Blackfriara-
bridge. This must be attended with inconvenience
and danger to those living upon and frequenting such
thoroughfares. We see, however, no help for it, but
regulating the passage and facilitating it in every
possible way. An arch, for instance, flung over the
end of Farringdon-street, and connecting Holborn
with Newgate- street, would completely free one
tgarkeeant thoroughfare.
though
hautions as these being
apparently unavoid-
ableence on what
exact point of the great cattle passage-road the actual
bongahtefarsee'riouSsu,cthhop
sale of it takes place.—Daily News.
evils, it is not of so much consequence

THE BATTLE OF SEDGEMOOR.—During the past
three weeks a number of skeletons have been discovered in
the parish of Greinton, not far from Swain's Leap. At
Greinton plantation a quarry has been opened and several
trees felled. This spot commands an extensive view of
Sedgemoor, where one of the Monmouth battles was fought,
and the remains discovered are supposed, and we entertain no
doubt of the fact. to be the remains of those engaged in the
battle. Some of the bodies were interred in rude coffins
formed of large stores, and the skeletons bespeak them to
have been men of noble stature.—. Bridgewater