The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-02 00:00:00

STEAM-BOAT PIERS ON THE
THAMES.

Wednesday a Court of Common Council was held for the
dispatch of public business. The principal business of the
day was, the consideration of the report of the Navigation
Committee on the petition of the inhabitants in the vicinity
of Blackfriars- bridge, for an improved pier for landing from
and embarking on board steam-vessels. The Court was fully
attended.

THE PIERS OF THE RIVER THAMES.
Mr. Thefts (the Chairman of the Navigation Committee) I
brought up the report relative toe steam-boat piers, and ex-
pressed his earnest hope that the Court would be as unani-
mous as the Committee had been in its adoption. The fol-
lowing are the principal paragraphs the report :—" That
we have duly proceeded in the examination of the allega-
tions in the petition, and upon inquiry it appears that the
subject of the erection of a steam-boat landing or pier at
Blackfriars. bridge has been for some time under considera-
tion. That in December, 1841, a conference was held by us
with the Blackfriars-bridge Committee when the plan of Mr.
Walker, the engineer, for a pier of two arches on the north-
west side of the bridge, was examined, and this Committee
expressed an opinion favourable thereto, but urged a hope
that any plan, before being finally agreed upon, should be
rendered subservient to the proposed general embankment of
the river. That when the Blackfriars-budge Committee
closed their labours, the matter was by this Honourable
Court referred to the Bridge-house Estates Committee, who
on the 30th of March, 1843, presented a report for authority
to obtain plans and models, which report was read, and the
consideration thereof adjourned, since which it does not ap-
pear to have been resumed.—( Hear.) That your Committee
are of opinion that some such erection as the one proposed
by Mr. Walker, modified with a view to the eventual carry-
ing oat of the general embankment of the river, would be a
great accommodation and security to the public ; and that
we should accordingly be empowered forthwith to take such
steps as we may deem advisable, to enable us to lay before
this Court a plan for a safe and suitable pier at Blackfriars-
bridge." The Chairman moved that the Court should agree
with the Committee in the report.
Mr. As:Dm:rose said he hoped the Navigation Committee
would not sleep upon the subject, but would follow the ex-
cellent example set by the Lord Mayor, in visiting all the
piers under the conservancy of the City of London, and
taking care that every construction of the kind should be
liable to no objection of instability or incommodiousness.—
(Hear, hear.) He particularly called the attention of the
Court to the Southwark-bridge pier, the Cadogan pier, and
like pier at present being formed at Vauxhall-bridge, all of
which he considered to be models of utility, and the last of
which would be a very great ornament to the neighbourhood.
He concluded by repeating his hope that the Committee
would not sleep in the business, and declaring that he had no
wish to continue the excitement occasioned by the calamity
which had occurred at Blackfriars-bridge.—(Hear.)
Mr. OBBARD said the former Committees against which
such strong censure had been expressed at the last Court,
ought to be released from the imputation of neglect, as the
Court was, in its collective capacity, really reprehensible.
Mr. HALL agreed with Mr. Obbard that the blame did not
justly lie with the Navigation Committee. It was impossible
not to see what embarrassments must have arisen from
erecting a permanent pier pending the great question of a
general embankment of the river contemplated by the Go-
vernment.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. GRESHAM could not see how any immediate remedy
was applicable by the terms of the report proportionate to
the immediate urgency which existed.
Mr. HICKS said that, if Mr. Gresham would wait until the
report should be agreed to, a paper would be submitted, to
their consideration, containing a comprehensive statement of
the important plan upon which it was intended to act.
Mr. GRESHAM observed that his apprehension was that
something might be proposed to which the Court would de-
mur for eighteen months more.
A MEMBER added that after the present excitement should
be abated, the report might just drop into the oblivion which
had been the fate of numerous other recommendations.
Mr. Lorr said there was one thing to which it was neces-
sary to call the attention of the Committee. The owners of
steam-piers, and the captains of steam-vessels, entertained
great objection to the placing of planks as a protection to the
public. He suggested that an attention to such a means of
security ought to form an item in the list of safeguards.
Deputy STEVENS said he thought that too much stir had
been made about the accident.—(Cries of "No, no.") Upon
looking at the circumstances of the accident he found that
although the erection had not been made to hold seventy
persons, it had been sufficiently strong for the purposes for
which it had been constructed. Ile did not see how the
Court would be justified in incurring a large expense at a
time when the general embankment of the Thames was under
consideration. He trusted that it would not for a moment
be supposed that lie did not feel as much as any other person
in that Court on account of the accident which had occurred,
but he could not see why there should be such alarm
amongst the members, as if they were all chargeable with
the consequences.—(Hear.)
Mr. PEW-TRESS was much surprised at the total insecurity
of the piers on the river, and considered the Court to have
been culpable in granting the power to ir.dividuals to erect
piers for their own profit, without demanding that stability
should be one of the principal conditions of the grant.
Upon the motion of Mr. Sracv, the important paper to
which Mr. Hicks referred, as containing the elements of the
remedy for the evils complained of was read. It was as fol
low.:—
" FLOATING PIERS.—The Corporation of London, acting
under the advice of eminent engineers, as well as their own
officers, have been hitherto unwilling to grant licenses for the
construction of temporary landing-places for steam-boat pas-
aengers, in the belief that some general plan for improviig
the banks and bed of the river would be adopted, in which
the better accommodation of steam-passengers might be pro
•
vided for, by the erection of strong and sub ,tantial perma-
nent piers.
" The recent melancholy accident at the floating platform
at Blackfriars, has, however, impressed upon the Committee
the conviction that the public safety demands the immediate
exercise of the authority of the Corporation, as conservators,
to avert the dangers attending the insecure and unstable
Boetitg piers and platforms as they at present exist on the
river. When the Committee consider that several hundreds
of thousands of persons weekly avail themselves of these
landing places to make use of steam-boats for purposes of
business, health, or recreation, it is manifest that, in the ab
sence of some general plan of embankment (which it may
require a series of years to accomplish), the continuance of
borne such temporary expedients in an amended form, is ab•
solutely necessary to afford present accommodation. The
Corporation have, therefore, given directions to their officers
to inspect and report upon the state and condition of every
steam-boat pier within their jurisdiction, with a view to the
application of the following rules and regulations as speedily
as they can be brought to bear upon the numerous piers
already existing, as well as upon those which may be here-
after erected.
" The Corporation will have to regret, if in the discharge
of the duty they have undertaken, they should be obliged in-
juriously to interfere with private interests or private conve-
nience ; but they rely upon the good feeling of the proprietors
of existing piers, by a speedy and cheerful acquiescence in
these reasonable rules, to spare them the necessity of resort- ,
ing to strong measures. The Corporation rely with equal
confidence upon the force of public opinion to sustain them in
their endeavours to give additional security and accommoda-
tion to steam-boat passengers, and to prevent the recurrence
of accidents similar to that which has so recently taken place.
" nor the purpose of carrying the foregoing objects into
execution, the Corporation have resolved—
." That no pier or landing-place for ateam-boat passengers
be allowed on the River Thames within their jurisdiction as
conservators of the river (viz., from Staines to Yantlet),
without a license in writing from the Navigation Committee
under the authority of the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor.
" That no such license be granted except upon a certiti-
sate from the Clerk of the Works, or other officer of the
navigation, appointed by the Committee, to the following
effect :
" let. That such pier or landing-place does not project
from the bank beyond a line laid down as the limit for tem-
porary piers, and that such pier is so constructed as not to in-
terfere with the navigation of the river beyond what the
necessity of the case absolutely requires.
" 2illy. That such pier is constructed of good sound ma-
terials-of a proper thickness, and in a suitable form to afford
all reasonable convenience to passengers, and to secure the
safety-of the public.
" 3dly. That the access to the pier from the land is pro.
tected by a suitable and sufficient gate or barrier.
" 4thly. That two red lights are fixed—one at each end of
the extremity of the pier.
" sthly. That a suitable drag and man line are provided
and placed at a convenient spot on the pier.
" 6thly. That a suitable chain painted white' upon a
dark ground, or black upon a light ground, has been
securely fixed a little above the water-mark all round the
Boating-barges and pier, as hold-fasts for persons falling over.
" That such license do continue only during the pleasure of
the Committee, and that such pier be removed in either of
the following cases :
" Ist. If from any alteration of the current from the for-
mation of a permanent embankment, or from other causes,
the pier shall, in the judgment of the Corporation, become
an impediment or obstruction to the navigation of the river.
" 2dly. If any part of the barges, piles, bridges, chains,
platforms, or any other part of the structure shall from ac-
cident, injury, or decay, become unsafe, and if it shall not be
immediately repaired with good sound materials of a suffi-
cient thickness, and rendered safe and secure to the satisfaction
of the Clerk of the Works.
" 3dly. If the gate or barrier at the entrance be not kept in
a sufficient state of strength to prevent the access of more
than a convenient number of persons, or if the person having
eliarge of the pier do permit passengers to remain upon or
over-crowd any part of the pier or platform ; or if he do per-
mit any other persons than passengers to use the pier.
" 4thly. If the red lights on the pier be not kept in a pro-
per state, or if they be not lighted and kept alight from dusk
till morning light, so as by night to show the position of the
pier and to define its extent.
" sthly. If a suitable drag and man-line be not always
kept on a convenient part of the- pier to be ever ready in case
of accident.
" ethly. If the chain above the water-mark of the pier be
not always kept securely fixed and in condition for use.
7thly. If any steam-boat be allowed to moor or to remain
attached to any part of the pier during the night.
Corporation reserve to themselves the right to make
r rules and regulations for the safety and conveni-
enceeh oh
ohithe public, and for the protection of the navigation,
as time
if
and._ experience may call for; and they will remove
• the pier such additional rules and regulation; be violated,
in the same manner as they Would do if they were incorpo-
rated in, and formed a part of, the roregoing regulations."
The reading of this paper evidently gave general satis-
faction.
Mr. Corm said there was a disgraceful and most annoying
nuisance, to which the paper made
irii? reference. He meant
t
the touting for passengers, which ho resided near the
piers were constantly in the habit of witnessing. The touters
not only took hold of passengers, but actually
for which
actually fought for
ti
them, in order to secure them for the
companies .
they exercised their rival zeal and
had spoken to the City Comini,ssioner upon the
Ile
subject, but
that officer did not seem to think that there was any law to
Auction his interference. He (Mr. Cope) thought there must
be some error in that opinion.
Mr. PiLkrrnEws concurred in the opinion expressed by
Mr. Cope.
Mr. WIRE condemned the course pursued be the Court
when the accident was discussed. If he were a member of
Parliament, and wanted to find arguments for depriving the
citizens of London of their privileges, he could have found
abundant reasons in the discussions which had taken place,
during which the Court cast the blame upon the Committees,
and the Committees cast the blame upon the Court. If, in-
stead of proceeding with useless and empty criminationi and
recriminations, the Court had copied the conduct of the
Liverpool authorities, and taken the whole management of
the river, over which they had complete control, into their
own hands, there would at the present moment no reason
fir complaint.—(Hear.) The Court was no doubt reprehen-
sible, for when plans for the erection of piers were presented
they were uniformly ordered to lie on the table. Ile did not
chink the report of the Committee went far enough in the
power for which they soaght, and he therefore should move,
as an amendment—" That the Committee be empowered
forthwith to take such steps, by and with the sanction cf the
Lord Mayor, as they may deem advisable, to erect a safe and
itaugnitacunblog orderserat
be
ptulascuskfriar.s;bridge, and that the 23d and 26th
d upon the occasion."—(Hear.)

Mr. GRESIUM was understood to adhere to his statement
of the former day, and to add his opinion that the Committee
had only half done the business they had been authorised
by the Court to do.
Mr. ASUURST supported the amendment, and expressed
an ardent wish that the Court would do as well as talk some-
thing.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. STAGY said there was no necessity for the amendment.
The report, if agreed to, would be an adequate security to
the public, and the piers would no longer be dangerous.
- Mr. PRIOR strongly supported the amendment, and urged
that a concurrence in the report would merely give rise to a
vast diversity of plans and speculations, and occasion still
greater delay. The plan of Mr. Walker had all the elements
of a sound and good construction.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HEPPELL trusted that the Court would negative the
amendment, and agree to.the report. Lying as they did
under the charge of having neglected an important duty,
they ought not to give up their whole power on so serious an
occasion to a Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
Alderman T. WOOD hoped the Court would adopt the
amendment. Apart from the recent accident, it must be
acknowledged that nothing could have been worse than the
floating piers.—(Hear, hear.) They were incommodious,
without order, or regularity, or plan, and there was about
them a total absence of security. He was satisfied that, as
conservators of the River Thames, they were bound to do
something for the security of the public, and at the present
season. Erections of piers ought not to be made upon the
principle of private property. All erections of the kind ought
to be swept away, and permanent places of public accommo-
dation ought to be formed by the Corporation.—(Hear, hear.)
The Corporation would be adequately reimbursed by the pub-
lic, and they would obtain an egsnopical superintendence
through the agency of the Watermen's Company. They
would also get rid of the dangerous competition between
rival steam-vessels, and of the noisy and annoying nuisance
of the touters.—(Hear, hear.) He was of opinion that the
best plan to pursue in the construction of steam-boat piers
was, to make them the adjuncts to the bridges, by which they
would be completely protected ; and he believel that if the
Corporation would adopt the suggestion, they Auld find the
Watermen's Company ready to pay for the whole outlay, and
to take the whole management upon themselves.—(Hear,
hear, and cries of " No.")
Mr. Hicks, although he proposed the original motion that
the Court should agree with the report, said he certainly pre-
ferred the amendment, upon the principle that " If ;were
done, it were well if 'twere done quickly."
Mr. HARRISON was decidedly against suspending the stand-
ing orders, especially to give to the Committee a power which
ought to be exercised by the Court itself.
The LORD MAYOR, in answer to some observations made
at the commencement of the discussion by Mr. Anderton,
who warmly thanked his Lordship for the example he had
set to the Court and its Committees, said, that from the in-
spection he had, with the aid of some of the officers of the
Corporation, made of the piers on the river, he had ascer-
tained that, with the exception of one or two, they were all
in a very bad condition, constructed of rotten barges, and
affording no protection to the public; and that the officers
had been instructed to make a report to the Committee upon
which they could act, which had been accordingly done.
The amendment was then negatived, and the report wet
agreed to, and referred back to the Committee to be carried
into execution.—Adjourned.

RULES FOR THE REGULATION
OF STEAM-VESSELS.

Draft Rules suggested to the Court of Mayor and
Aldermen of the City of London, for the regulation
of steam-vessels, pursuant to the provisions of the
Watermen's Act, 7 and 8 Geo. IV. cap. 75.
2. That from and after the allowance of these bye-
laws, the Court of Master, Wardens, and Assistants
of the Company of Watermen and Lightermen of the
river Thames, upon the application of the owner or
owners of any steam or sailing passage-boat or vessel
which shall be worked or navigated upon the said
River Thames within the limits specified in the said
Act of Parliament, shall grant a license to such owner
or owners to use and work for hire any such boat or
vessel (for carrying passengers) upon the said river
within the limits aforesaid; in which license shall be
expressed the number of persons or passengers such
boat or vessel shall be permitted to take and carry,
according to the admeasurernent thereof as herein-
after is provided; and such, licence shall contain a
number for such boat or vessel, which shall be regis-
tered in a book or books to be kept for that purpose,
by the clerk of the said company ; and the owner or
owners of such boat or vessel shall cause such name
of every such steam-boat or vessel to be painted and
kept legible on the outside of each paddle-box, or if
there shall not be any paddle-box, then upon the
quarter or some other conspicuous part of the outside
of such steam-boat or vessel, in plain legible letters,
twelve inches long at the least, and broad in propor-
tion, so as to be seen plainly in the day-
time by persons passing on the said river;
and shall also cause the registered number of every
such boat or vessel, and the number of passengers
licensed to be carried therein, to be painted and kept
legible upon the inside of each paddle-box of every
such steam-boat or vessel, or if there shall not be any
paddle-box, then upon some conspicuous part of such
steam-boat or vessel, and upon the companion or some
other conspicuous part of such sailing boat or vessel,
in plain letters and figures, two inches long at the
least, and broad in proportion, so as to be seen plainly
by persons upon deck. And if any such steam or
sailing-boat or vessel, whose voyage shall commence
and terminate within the limits aforesaid, shall be
used or worked (for hire or gain) within the limits
aforesaid without such license for the same having
been first obtained as aforesaid, or without such name
so painted and kept legible on the outside of such
boat or vessel as aforesaid, or without such registered
number, and the number of passengers licensed to be
carried in such boat or vessel respectively so painted
and kept legible on the inside of such boat or vessel
as aforesaid, the master or other persons having the
'command or management of such boat or vessel shall
forfeit and pay for every such offence any sum not
exceeding five pounds.
3. That no steam-boat or sailing passage-boat or
vessel navigated upon the said river, whose voyage
shall commence and terminate within the limits afore-
said, shall be licensed to carry more than one person
or passenger for every four square feet of the deck of
such steam or sailing passage-boat or vessel, to be mea-
sured within the gunwales, deducting from the gross
admeasurement one-tenth part thereof for the com-
panions, skylights, steam-chests, &c., upon the said
deck (children under the age of twelve months not to
be included). And if any such boat or vessel whose
voyage shall commence and terminate within the
limits aforesaid, shall be navigated upon the said
river within the limits aforesaid, carrying any greater
number of persons or passengers than shall be ex-
pressed in the license granted by the said Compimy of
Master,Wardens, and Assistants as aforesaid, the master
or other person having the command or management
of every such boat or vessel shall forfeit and pay for
every person or passenger exceeding such number any
sum not exceeding forty shillings.
4. That if any person shall act as master or
in command or management of any steam-boat
or sailing passage-boat vessel, whose voyage
shall commence and terminate within the limits
aforesaid, until approved and licensed so to
.lo by the Court of Masters, Wardens, and Assistants
of the Company of Watermen and Lightermen cf the
river Thames, every person so offending shall for
every such offence forfeit and pay any sum not ex-
ceeding five pounds ; and that if at any time it shall
appear to the said Court of Master, 'Wardens, and
Assistants, that the loss of human life or any damage
or injury to the person or property of any person or
persons on the said river within the limits aforesaid
was or had been occasioned by reason of the negli-
gence, unskilfulness, or misbehaviour of any person so
approved and licensed as aforesaid, the said Court of
Master, Wardens, and Assistants shall and may from
time to time suspend or annul and make void the license
granted to such, person as aforesaid ; and if any such
person shall act as master or in the command or
management of any such steam-boat or sailing pas-
sage-boat or vessel within the limits aforesaid, during
the time his said license shall be so suspended or an-
nulled and made void, or if any such person shall
neglect or refuse to produce (and deliver up to be
cancelled) to the said Court of Master, 'Wardens, and
Assistants, any license which may have been so
granted to him as aforesaid, when required so to do
by writing, signed by the clerk of the said Company,
and left with such person, or at his last known or
most usual place of abode, then and in every such
case he shall forfeit and pay for every such offence
any sum not exceeding, five pounds.
5. That the master or other person having the
command or management of any steam-boat or ves-
sel navigated Lyon the said River Thames, within the
limits aforesaid, shall whilst navigating the same
within the limits aforesaid keep as far from any sand
or
.ballast craft whilst getting sand or ballast, and
from any lighter-boat, wherry, and other vessel as
the depth of water and other circumstances will per-
mit, and shall when passing such sand or ballast
craft, lighter-boat, wherry, or other vessel, so reduce
or regulate the speed of such steam-boat or vessel
as to prevent as far as possible the swell occasioned'
by such steam-boat or vessel from being forced into
upon or over such sand or ballast craft, lighter-boat,
wherry, or other vessel, under the penalty of forfeit-
ing and paying for every such offence any suns not
exceeding five pounds.
6. That the master or other person having the
command or management of any steam-boat or
vessel, when navigated on the said river within the
limits aforesaid, shall whilst navigating the same
within the limits aforesaid, remain, continue, and be
on one of the paddle-boxes or the bridge of such
steam-boat or vessel, and shall not permit or suffer
any other person, except the crew of such steam -boat
or vessel, to be and remain on such paddle-box or
bridge of such steam-b Oat or vessel, and shall cause
and procure a proper look-out to be kept from the
bow of the said steam-boat or vessel, under the
penalty of forfeiting and paying for every such offence
any sum not exceeding five pounds.
7. That all steam-boats or vessels navigated on the
said River Thames within the limits aforesaid, in a
westernly direction, shall from and immediately after
pidneugns, dkheidanvoetnhteaweo3v,aesrtnrdion strong
red
asnpadruntil daylight in the mbrn-
lfiagshtetsn,edeigtohtthfeeetfoarpeamrta,sts,uosr-
if there shall be no foremast then such red lights shall
be fastened to the funnel, twenty feet at least above
the deck, or to the top of the funnel, and another
strong red light fastened under the bowsprit ; and all
steam-boats or vessels navigated within the limits
aforesaid, in an easternly direction, shall have two

strong blue lights, eight feet apart, suspended in like
manner on a yard or spar fastened to the foremast, or
to the funnel as aforesaid if there shall be no fore-
mast, at the same height above the deck as aforesaid,
and one strong blue light fastened under the bowsprit
as aforesaid ; and in case the weather shall be so foggy
as to prevent such lights being seen, or in case of
thick fog during the day-time and such steam-boats
or vessels shall not be under weigh, the same shall
remain at anchor, or if such steam-boats or vessels
shall be under weigh then the same shall bring up
witil the weather clears; and in case such steam-boats
or vessels shall not have such lights as hereinbefore
directed, or shall be navigated during a fog as is
hereinbefore prohibited, the master or other person
having the command thereof shall, for every such
offence, forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding five
pounds.
8. That no master or other person having the com-
mand or management of any steam-boat or vessel
navigated upon the said river within the limits afore-
said shall take on board or put out any passenger or
other person whilst the engine of such steam-boat or
vessel is in motion, nor shall cause such engine to be
again put in motion until the boat or wherry bring-
ing or taking away such passenger or other person
to or from such steam-boat or vessel shall be suffi-
ciently clear of such steam-boat or vessel, under the
penalty of forfeiting and paying for every such of-
fence any sum not exceeding five pounds.
9. That no master or other person having the com-
mand or management of any steam-boat, or vessel
navigated on the said river within the limits aforesaid,
shall allow such steam-boat or vessel to be placed
alongside any ship or vessel whilst towing the same
on the said river between London-bridge and Green-
wich Hospital, under the penalty of forfeiting and
paying for every such offence any sum not exceeding
five pounds.
10. That no steam-boat or vessel of more than two
hundred tons burthen, registered tonnage, shall
be navigated upon the said river westward of Green-
wich Hospital at a greater speed than at the rate of
six miles in an hour with the tide, nor more than
four miles in an hour against the tide ; and that no
steam-boat or vessel of less than two hundred tons
burthen, registered tonnage, shall be navigated upon"
the said river westward of Greenwich Hospital at a
greater speed than at the rate of eight miles in an
hour with the tide nor more than six miles in an
hour against the tide (such distarices respectively to
be computed and ascertained by the marks of admea-
surement set up on the shore of the said river by the
authority of the Corporation of the City of London);
and if the master or other person having the com-
mand or management of any such vessel shall navi-
gate the same, or permit the same to be navigated,
within the limits specified in this bye-law, at any
greater rate or speed than as aforesaid, he shall for-
feit and pay for every such offence any sum not ex-
ceeding five pounds.
It is intended to take the above rules into conside-
ration on Saturday next.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

?ROY UM EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.

GLOBE.—Captain Warner's wonderful invention was
introduced to the notice of the House of Commons last
evening by Lord Ingestre. A more complete exposure
of the affair can scarcely be imagined. Not the vestige
of a well-supported claim to novelty of discovery, or to
an improved mode of applying an agency already known,
was left to Captain Warner ; who, in nautical language,
was " blown out of the water." This was effected by
Sir R. Peel's straightforward, matter-of-fact explana-
tion ; followed up, as it was, by the narrative of Sir
Howard Douglas, who described the proceedings of Sir
Byam Martin and himself, to whom Sir Robert Peel had
referred the application of Captain Warner. An oppor-
tunity to exhibit the extraordinary discovery he had
made had been afforded ; and the way in which Captain
Warner had acted in the transaction was explained. The
Hon. W. Cowper, private secretary to Lord Melbourne,
when Captain Warner pressed the purchase of
his discovery on the Administration of which his
Lordship was the head, also supplied valuable testi-
mony as to the real merits of the discovery. Sir C.
Napier ably exposed the absurdity of Captain Warner's
claims to any new discovery in science ; or to any
valuable novelty of application of a power previously
known. With the bluntness of phrase and breadth of
humour peculiar to the profession, the Gallant Commo-
dore ridiculed the whole affair off Brighton, as wonder-
ful only in the eyes of persons either wholly or pAtially. ,
ignorant of what is generally known to nautical men.
The greatest wonder of the performance, in Sir C.
Napier's opinion, is, that any professional man could
have been deceived into the belief that there was any-
thing extraordinary in the transaction. Captain War-
ner's pretended invention of a new explosive power—
the possession of which would enable the nation that
exclusively possessed it to defy the world in arms—has
been extensively used for the purpose of attack upon
Lord Melbourne's Government, and also of reproach to
the present Ministry. Both Lord Melbourne and Sir R.
Peel, it was last night shown, adopted the course which
they were bound to adopt under the circumstances. They
referred Capt. Warner's discovery to the scientific de-
partments of the Government; directed that a commission
should issue. formed of the most eminent officers, by whose
skill the efficiency of the discovery should be tested ; and
upon their report determined to act. Instead of having
treated Captain Warner, or his invention, with neglect, it
clearly, appears that both the late and the present Govern-
ment acted with fairness, and even with liberality
towards both : they provided him with the means,
and afforded him opportunities of demonstrating the al-
leged powers of his invention. The only thing
they would not do—but this was the very thing
Captain Warner showed he was most anxious
should be done was this : they would not pur-
chase without proof. Captain Warner bad been
most prodigal of professions—most prolific in assu-
rances. He had performed extraordinary feats, by means
of his powerful agent, at various times and in divers
places—of which,,, however, there were no persons alive
who could verify his statements ; and no records of
his doings in the public offices ; where, if the feats had
been achieved, they might be expected to be found
Captain Warner, among other representations of
what his discovery had effected, stated to the Commis-
sioners that he had sunk two French privateers with his
invisible shell toward the end of the war. No record,
however, no trace could be found of this extraoi dinary
transaction. With his "long range," he said, he had
destroyed rocks in the islands off Vigo Bay, at six miles
distance. In the absence of oral or documentary
evidence of these extraordinary performances, the Com-
missioners asked for ocular proof. They, possibly, thought
that Captain Warner had, in his descriptions of the
powers of his "long range," practised largely with the
long bow ; and they wished to see as well as hear. This,
however, was declined. As Mr. W. Cowper remarked,
in the course of his statement of what took place be-
tween the late Government and Captain Warner, rela-
tive to his invention—" Captain Warner was more
desirOus of corresponding with the moneyed than with
the scientific departments of the Government—more
anxious to have his discoveries bought than tested."
the Prussian Government has, it seems, been equally
unjust to Captain Warner. The scientific and patriotic
discoverer of this destruction-spreading agent—with
a far greater affection for pelf than for country—has,
it seems, been huckstezing with a foreign State for
the purchase of his secret. If the Government of
Prussia would have entered into a blind bargain, and
paid the required sum without knowing whether it had
got anything in the shape of value for its money,
there would have been an end of Captain Warner's
applications to the Government of England to possess
themselves of the wonderful invention. We might have
read the sin of our incredulity by the glare of the fires
kindled by means of this destructive agent in our har-
bours and arsenals—if, indeed, our "tight little island"
had not been blown out of the ocean, and England
been numbered among the nations which now exist
only in the pages of history. Sir G. Cockburn's ac-
count of the way in which he has reason to believe the
explosion off Brighton was effected, agrees, in all the
material points, with the suggestion we ventured to
offer as to the process by which it was accomplished.
Lord Ingestre seems to have been pretty consider-
ably laughed at in professional circles for his gratuitous
attestations in behalf of a very questionable experiment,
the validity of which he ought rather to have suspected,
than affirmed. Incapable of deception in any form,
Lord Ingestre, like many of his profession, is the more
likely to be deceived. Had Lord Ingestre seen what the
officer referred to by Sir G. Cockburn " distinctly saw,"
he would not have signed the certificate which bore his
name, and induced the public to confide in the extra-
ordinary accounts of the magical, if not miraculous, per-
formance off Brighton. The correspondence moved for
by Lord Ingestre is to be produced ; and we trust,
printed. To a new and enlarged edition of " Popular
Delusions" it would contribute an interesting chapter.

STANDARD.—Lord Ingestre last night moved, in
the House of Commons, for the production of the cor-
respondence between the present and late Govern -
ments and Captain Warner, upon the subject of
the extraordinary destrUctive instrument, the invention
of which is asserted by the captain. Lord Ingestre gave
a full history of the progress of the alleged discovery, and
of Captain Warner's endeavours to have it adopted by the
Government • and Sir Robert Peel, who freely granted
the correspondence, seconding the Noble Lord's motion,
gave a supplementary history of the efforts of the two
Governments to come to what might be considered rea-
sonable terms with Captain Warner. Sir Howard
Douglas, Sir Charlei Napier, and several other members
spoke, and the debate upon the matter occupied nearly
the whole of the night's sitting. Sir Charles Napier
gave a graphic and highly amusing account of his own
share in the attempt to burn the French flotilla at Bou-
logne by explosive globes, and offered an irresistibly
comical proposition, to blow up the Noble Mover if
only he would oblige him by sitting down upon an
explosive mixture. We are not sorry that this de-
bate has taken place, because we think that it
will set the public mind at ease upon a subject
that has caused some anxiety since the late
exhibition at Brighton. We live in an age
apparently of great mechanical discovery, certainly of
great discovery in chemical science, and we see daily
the development of so many wonders either by the ap-
plication of capital to well-known though neglected con-
trivances, as in case of gas-light, steam navigation, rail-
roads, &c., or by the use of really novel inventions,
as the employment of galvanic electricity for va-
rious purposes, that things cease to be thought
improbable because they are astonishing. Nay, we
are not quite sure that credulity does not incline
in the opposite direction, and cause to be most easily
believed whatever is most opposed to experience. If
we do not go to far as to .ay credimus quia impossibile,

we almost acknowledge that we most readily give credit
to what seems impossible. Under these circumstances
it is well that the minds of men, somewhat dismayed by
the notion of that tremendous power which Captain
Warner claims to possess, should have the means of
judging of the whole matter upon considerations distinct
from the physical possibility or probability of the exist-
ence of such a power at the command of any one. Let
us glance at the debate in this light, and in this light
only, conceding, for argument sake, the possibility that
there may be such things as the "invisible shell" and " the
long range," the powers which Capt. Warner claims to
have invented. We ourselves prefer to consider the
subject in this light, because we are bound to confess
that some years ago we were believers, to some,
though not to the whole extent, in the importance
of Captain. Warner's alleged discoveries, and have
since changed our opinion altogether, upon the
external evidence, and not from a consideration
of the physical difficulties. In short, we are now
satisfied, from Captain Warner's proceedings, that
whether the things he speaks of be or be
not possible •to he accomplished, he has not accom-
plished them. The captain's whole story, as detailed
in last night's debate, is a mass of improbabilities—not
of physical improbabilities, we have nothing to do with
them, but of moral improbablities and of gross incon-
sistencies. Captain Warner says that he has been
twenty-seven years in possession of the secret of' the
" invisible shell." and twelve years in possosion of the
secret of the " long range" (a power by which fleets, forts,
cities, nay mountains, can be destroyed at six miles'
distance): There is some inaccuracy in the statement
of the age of the invention of " the shell," because
Captain Warner says that by the use of it he de-
stroyed two French privateers in the late war—one
at St. Mato, the other at St. Vallery—whereas all
war with France was happily at an end twenty-nine
years ago, and the naval war was at an end thirty
years ago. This inaccuracy may be a mere slip of
memory ; but there are graver objections to the story
of these two privateers. Captain Warner says, that
when he destroyed them he was serving under his father
in the ship Nautilus, one of his Majesty's smallest ves-
sels, at the time in the humble service of landing spies
on the. French coast ; but there is no record of the
destruction of the privateers at the Admiralty
or of the spies in the Foreign-office. No head money
was claimed, though the destruction of two privateers
would have brought a good round sum to Captain War-
ner's father, and it is said that, contrary to the peremp-
tory rule of the service. the Nautilus kept no lig. In
the absence of all this, the natural evidence of the destruc-
tion of the privateers, it might be expected that some of
the crew of the Nautilus, who cannot he all dead, would
be produced, • but there is no suggestion that any
living man except Captain Warner himself knows
anything of the fate of these two unlucky vessels ;
nay, we have not even a reference to a newspaper
paragraph. Nor is this all. Captain Warner, in his
correspondence with the Government, rates the expense
of an experiment with his invisible shell at 2,7001.,
to destroy the two privateers must, therefore, have
cost him at the very least 5,4001. Where a sub-
officer of the Nautilus could get so much money
we have perhaps no right to inquire, but we must admire
the generosity that could give so much to the public
service without asking one farthing of remuneration ;
the modesty, too, which in the moment of triumphant
success restrained the captain from apprising the Ad-
miralty of the extraordinary power of which the in-
ventor was in possession. That was the time to bargain
with the Government for the sale of the secret.
Neither at that time, nor in 1816,. when Lord Ex-
mouth's expedition was fitting out ; nor in 1828, when
Sir Edward Codrington was proceeding to the Medi-
terranean ; at no. period within sixteen years at the
least, did Captain Warner think of placing at the
service of his country, or applying to his own
profit, an invention which had proved so successful
at St. Malo and St. Vallery, and which be estimates
at 200,0001.• Few other men would so long lie out
of so much money, or lose the opportunity of war-
like preparation to bring so precious an instrument
of war into the market, reserving its sale for a
moment of profound peace. We must now, however,
come to the long range, an invention only twelve years
old. The first circumstance that will appear remark-
able to most observers is the increased fondness with
which Captain Warner adheres to his invisible shell,
notwithstanding the later 'discovery, by which the
use of that, and, indeed, of all other instruments
of war must be superseded. What in the name of
common sense can be the use of invisible shells, or
any other shells, against fleets, forts, armies cities, and
mountains which you can disperse into atoms from a dis-
tance of six miles. Every one has heard the story of the
mountebank who sold powder to kill fleas (privately ex-
plained to operate by being put into the insect's mouth),
and the rebuke of the clown, who said, that when he had
caught the flea he wanted no help from doctor's stuff to
kill him.. So it seems to us, that if you can destroy
your enemy at six miles' distance you may spare the
trouble of creeping under his feet to set traps. As
there is no allegation of any authenticated trial of the
long range power, we may say the less of it. For the
rest we think that the whole tenour of the correspondence,
as it was given in the debate last night. proves the reverse
ofa willingness on Captain Warner's part to come
to the test of a fair experiment. There is always some
hitch suggested by the captain's suspicions—suspicions
which, in our opinion, do not always treat her Majesty's
Ministers as gentlemen ought to be treated. It is plain
that they must trust Captain Warner, or Captain
Warner must trust them, and it is no imputation upon
any one to say that he is less entitled •to confidence
than the responsible Ministers of the Crown. With
respect to tho exhibition at Brighton., as far as our ex-
perience goes, it has rather damaged than served Capt.
Warner in the judgment of scientific men: The opinion
among such men is, that though it is possible that the
destruction of the John o' Gaunt may no doubt have
been a bona fide operation, the result might with perfect
ease have been produced by preparation, contrivance,
and sleight•of--hand.