The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON,- FRIDAY MORNING, FRBRITARY 14, 1845.

patent coffins for burying a hundred and twenty men a
once. The last class in the service which he noticed was
that of the gun-brigs, and of those a whole host had been
introduced into the service, likely to excite a great deal of
notice but calculated to be of little service. There was
the Barker, the Bruizer, and number of others, which if
taken together, would form a whole pack. But these were
soon exploded, and, the ten-gun brigs were shortly after-
wards introduced for them. These again in their turn
had last 'year been condemned by the shipwright's
committee. The country had been put to an enor-
mous expense in their construction, and for their
support, but they we re proved to be utterly unfit for
the purpose for which they were intended. The
Admiralty had indeed thrown away their own exertions
and the money of the country in building bad ships, and
when the American war broke out, and they might have
looked forward to that event for many years, the
Admiralty were utterly unable to contend with their
adversaries. They had not indeed a single
vessel of the same class fit to meet their
corvettes, nor a single frigate capable of contending
with their frigates. He (Sir C. Napier) well remem-
bered the report of that day, when a naval officer would
have been scouted if he he had ventured to utter even a
hint of the inability of British ships to contend success-
fully with American vessels of the same rating as their
own, and notwithstandingall the warning they had received
the Government of the day had never opened their eyes
until they learned that three British frigates had been
captured and conveyed into American ports.—(Hear.)
What did they do then? The Admiralty immediately
ordered six forty-gun frigates to be laid down ; but
they were so constructed that they proved to be utterly
useless, and they consequently had three on
hand at the present moment, and they were likely still
to retain them in the same unprofitable state. The
Right Hon. and Gallant Officer at that time at the head
of the Admiralty directed Sir It. Seppings to lay down
a ship which should have such qualities as would obviate
the defects which had been experienced. It was then
considered that ships had not been built strong enough.
With the assistance of Mr. Bright, Mr. Roberts, Mr.
Lang, and several other shipwrights, much improvement
had, no doubt, been effected. Ships had, for twenty
years before, been built with stern galleries, and much
that was calculated to overload and encumber them.
These they altogether did away with, and introduced the
plain round stern, which had now been generally adopted,
and with admirable success. Another error com-
mitted by the shipwrights of those days was in the in-
troduction of heavy transome timbers. They had intro-
duced heavy diagonal timbers along the water-way,
which quite overloaded the vessels, and were lit
only for ships of far greater proportions
than those into which they were placed.
He commanded at that time a ship that was considered
one of the finest in the navy, but when she was tried it
was found that she could not stand on her legs. There
was also the Caledonia, which was esteemed a first-rate
ship, but when she was tried she was found almost use-
less, and she had to be put into dock and taken to
pieces. All those errors at length became so evident
that a change in the system of ship-building
became necessary ; and, he must say, they owed many
improvements in this particular to the Yacht Club.—
(Hear, hear.) Those vessels which had been built
under the Navy Board were constructed in such a
manner that they would neither move, tack, or sheet.
But at last the feeling of the public became so strong
that the Admiralty and the Navy Boards were
obliged to give way. Sir William Symonds was
allowed to construct a ship, Captain Hayes was
allowed to construct one, and Captain llendall
built another. Those ships were the Sapphire, the
Challenger, and the Acorn, and those frigates, with the
Columbine, which was an 18-gun ship, the elf, and
others, went to sea. The Sapphire and the Columbine
were the best of those vessels, and the guns of the
weather ship would go under the bottom of the leeward
one, while the guns of the leeward ship would go over
the truck of the weather one. He, in common with many
other persons, wished to see the construction of their ves-
sels improved, and he wrote a letter on the subject on the
Ist of October, 1827, to his Royal Highness the Duke
of Clarence, from which he begged leave to read an ex-
tract to the House. In that letter he stated that the
naval service of the country would be much better con-
ducted if the Naval and Admiralty Board were amalga-
mated, and the whole placed under the controul of the
Lord High Admiral. It was generally allowed that the
Navy Board were the last to adopt any improvements;
they disregarded the suggestions of others, believing that
the whole wisdom of the navy was centred in themselves.
For a naval officer to obtain a seat at the Naval Board,
it was necessary that he should possess interest enough
to get appointed to one of the foreign dockyards, and
after moving about from one to another, he succeeded to
one of the first vacancies at Somerset House. But he
had so often expressed his opinion of how the Admi-
ralty was formed, that he `need not go into the auestion
again. When the Right lion. Baronet 'came into office,
he (Sir Charles Napier) followed up the letter he had
just quoted by a pamphlet, addressed to Sir J. Cheate.
The Right Honourable Baronet, as one of the first
acts of his administration, broke up the Naval
Board, and he highly approved of that step ; but he
did not think so highly of the body which had been
substituted for it. The consequence had been, the
throwing of an immense quantity of work on the Ad-
miralty, particularly on the First Lord, to such an ex-
tent, that it was morally and physically impossible for
any man to go through the duties of that office, so as to
look into all the subjects of great importance that were
brought before him every day of his life. It was not in
the power of any man to do it. It was perfectly impos-
sible; and if they did not take some steps to change the
system, they would continue to commit the errors which
their predecessors had committed. The first thing the
Right Hon. Baronet did in office, and for which he gave
him great credit, was, after seeing the ability which Sir
William Symonds had displayed, to give him an oppor-
tunity of building a larger ship. He had allowed him,
and had taken the responsibility of allowing him, to jump
from an eighteen-gunship to building a fifty-gun frigate.
Sir William Symonds had been commissioned to build
the Vernon, and she had answered perfectly well. When
Sir William Symonds had built the Vernon, the Right
Honourable Baronet commissioned him to build a larger
ship. He thought the Right Hon. Baronet was not
right in so doing, because Sir William Symonds had
never been brought up in a dockyard, and could not be
supposed to possess that practical knowledge of ship-
building which was necessary. After the Vernon was
launched, very favourable reports were made of her qua-
lifications. The Captains who had sailed in her all reported
favourably of her. After that, Sir William Symonds
had built several 26-gun frigates, and several 16-gun
brigs. All the captains who had sailed these vessels
had reported favourably of them, and they had said that
the brigs' more particularly were a great improvement
upon the former 18-gun brigs. The next ship which
Sir William Symonds had built was the Vanguard.
Much had been said against that ship ; but be believed
the ship was a good ship. He had an opportunity of
seeing her tried in the Mediterranean. She bad been
tried against the Powerful and the Ganges. He had seen
her tried in a heavy gale against six ships of the line.
It was at night, and he must admit that when daylight
came the Vanguard was the most leeward ship. He
was much surprised at that, but it could scarcely be con-
sidered a fair trial, because unforeseen circumstances
might have occurred to occasion such a state of things;
and they had had no opportunities subsequently of
giving her a fair trial. But he was free to admit that
the Vanguard was a good, efficient, and seaworthy ship.
But when the model of the ship had been presented to
the Admiralty, it was evident that their Lord-
ships had not sufficiently considered the subject.
The Admiralty did not appear to have sufficiently con-
sidered the model of the Vanguard. As fitted out at the
present moment, she would be set on fire in the very
first hour of action. The Vanguard appeared on the
Navy-list as an 80-gun ship, but she should be only
reckoned as a 78-gun ship, as she lost two of her guns in
the Mediterranean. The Gallant Officer condemned the
construction of the Pique, as expensive, clumsy, and
ineffective. On her voyage to the West Indies she la-
boured to such an extraordinary degree, that Captain
Baxter, who was a passenger, told her captain that if
she did not get up her runners and tackle, her course
would be dangerous. Several vessels had been laid down
on the model of the Pique, and six vessels had been laid
down at an enormous expense. The Surveyor
of the Navy had been allowed to build a
three-deck ship, called the Queen, and in order
to build the Queen the Royal Frederic was taken
to pieces. Such was the eclat that attended the com-
pletion of this vessel that the Queen of England went to
Brighton to see her. The Queen was sent to Malta,
under the command of one of the oldest officers in the
service, a man seventy-five years of age ; and in order
that the Admiralty might form an opinion as to her sail-
ing powers the Formidable was sent out with her, and he
(Sir Charles Napier) thought that a very wisp step.
He had forgotten to say that, with the example of the
Pique before their eyes, the Board of Admiralty laid
down no fewer than six Queens—(Laughter)—and that
he conceived was extremely blameable in them.—
(Laughter.) He believed it to be the fact, nevertheless,
and if he could get the papers he had asked for, he would
be able to show the state those ships were now in.
Well, the Queen went to Malta, and the Admiralty
seemed to be satisfied with her sailing powers. Now,
he would read the report of the Board of Admiralty,
as to the sailing powers of the Queen; and here let him
say that he could hardly believe, when he read it, that
such a document could have emanated from the Board
of Admiralty. The document was headed, " Character
of the ship after nine months' trial." (Here the Hon.
Member read a series of questions and answers from the
report, which caused loud laughter throughout. Some
of them were, " How does the Queen ride?" Answer,
"Easy." " How does she carry her helm?" "Rather
sly ?"—(Laughter.) " How does she wear her,
stays ?" (Great laugther.) "Is she weatherly -
or the contrary, as compared with other ships?"—
(Continued laughter.) Answer, " Weatherly." " Does
she lie-to easy ?" Answer, " Very easy."—(Laughter.)
"Is she weak built or strong ?" Answer, " Very
strong."—(Laughter.) Then followed a series of ques•
tions on nautical points of every position almost in which
a ship could be placed on a long voyage, to every one of
which, the answer was, " Never tried," which caused a
continuation of the laughter.) The Hon. Member then
said he would come to another report of the
Board of Admiralty, on another trial of the
Queen, after twenty-two months. He then read the
questions, the answers to which appeared to be of the
same nature, many of which were " never tried in that
way," which the Hon. and Gallant Member said, put
him in mind of the grave-digger in Hamlet, when he
had taken all:the coats and waistcoats off.—(Laughter.)
Now, in order that it should not be said that he wanted
to make " fish of one and flesh of another"—(Laugh-
ter)—he would read the report of an officer of, the navy
one of the most clever and talented in the service. He had
set out by praying the attention of the House to this
question, for it was not one either of party or politics.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, he would say, it was wrong for
the Board of Admiralty to lay down six Queens—
see why they were
(Laughter)—he certainly could not

proceeded with. Well, the Queen came home, was. sent
into docks, and underwent an examination by the
officers he had alluded to ; and the result was,
that the Queen was a vessel that had been re-
presented in a manner calculated to ruin any ship.
It appeared that the Queen steered so badly that she
was obliged to have her foresail up and her mainsail set
to keep her by the wind. She pitched in such a tre-
mendous manner that her middle-deck guns were in the
water, and he understood that her rolling was of the
same nature. He had before him the report of the gal-
lant officer commanding her, who could not tell how she
would behave in Malta harbour—(Laughter)—and who
seemed to have had much difficulty in picking up a
gale of wind—(Laughter)—which could not be done
on the coast of Portugal, in winter, but if he had
extended his peregrinations as far as the the Westward
Isles, he would have perhaps found no difficulty what-
ever. It appeared from the reports of this Gallant
Officer, that the Queen found great difficulty in steering
for want of sufficient power in her rudder, and that
under low and easy sail she could not be well kept to
tho wind. The Queen returned to port, and was finally
paid off, at Sheerness, and was now in the
Dockyard, at Chatham, to have her keel increased,
her stern-post changeds, !her magazine altered,
and other repairs. This was of course all done with the
approval of the surveyor of the navy himself. Now, if
this doctrine did not succeed in the case of the Queen,
what was to be done? Were they to return to the system
upon which they acted fifty-five years ago? Were they
to go on building three-deckers and making them
seventy-fours, building seventy-fours and making
them frigates, building frigates and making
them corvettes ?—(Hear.) If the Queen did not
answer, it would puzzle the Admiralty to tell
what to do with her? The only thing they could do was
to follow the example of their predecessors in the case
of the Boscawen. That ship was first of all laid down,
in 1814, as a seventy-four gun ship ; in 1819, she was
made an eighty-gun ship ; and, in 1834, after
eight years' sailing, she was changed into a seventy-gun
ship, upon the surveyor's present plan. He came next
to the Albion. Sir R. Symonds, before he left the navy,
laid down three ninety-two-gun ships, the Rodney,
the Nile, and the London. The Rodney was dis-
patched to a distant station. She carried thirty-two-
pounders
on her lower, main, and quarter-decks ; she
measured 2.626 tons, and her hull cost 67,5501.
That vessel, as he before observed, was commanded by
Admiral Parker, than whom there was no better seaman.
She was next commanded by Captain Mansell, who was
an equally good officer, and after a careful examination
she was approved by both. Take her as a sea boat or as
a man-of-war, there was no better vessel,thoughof course
she could not sail so fast as vessels of a smaller
size. Though she carried five months' provisions, and
stores for a year, and was considerably loaded, she car-
ried her lover deck several inches out of the
water. She was as lively as any ship could be.
When the late Lords of the Admiralty came into
office, it was very natural that they should try
to build ships on the new principle, which would
be as good as those built on the old one; and, acecor-
dingly, the Albion was built, and commanded by Capt.
Lockart, an excellent seaman. He believed that the
Right Hon. and Gallant Officer opposite approved of
the Albion, and wrote a pamphlet in praise of the prin-
ciple upon which she was built. Well, when she was sent
with the Caledonia on an experimental trip, he
was informed that the Albion rolled in a dreadful
manner, and that it was perfectly impossible to
keep her lower port-holes open. There was an
anecdote related of her which spoke volumes.
When the captain came alongside the Caledonia and
saw how quiet she was, compared to his own ship, he
called out to the Captain of the Caledonia, and said
(he would use his own words), " Damn my eyes,
Jack, your ship's aground."—(Much laughter.) The
Albion was a stiff ship, there was no doubt of it.
If there were no other reason, the ;great breadth of her
beam would be sufficient to ensure that quality. Her
sails also were better set than those of the St. Vincent.
If he understood the Gallant Officer aright, there was
a serious disadvantage to which she was subject—an. ina-
bility to keep her lower ports open when the weather was
rough. During the time she was in company with other
three-deckers and those otherships of the squadron which
had the whole of their ports open and their guns
run out, the Albion was obliged to keep her
lower ports closed. This was no slight disadvantage,
for if the commanding officer had made a signal for
the captain to open his lower ports and run out his guns,
he must have been placed in this very unpleasant posi-
tion—that he must either have disregarded the signal,
and so disobeyed his orders, or, by obeying them,
have opened his ports, and by bringing them,
through the sway of the ship, below the sur-
face of the water, have swamped the ship. He
might, it is true, have made a report to the Admi-
ralty that he was unable to carry on with his lower
ports open, but this would have been, after all, but
mere talk, in which the country could take no
interest, however much it might justify her captain
for his conduct. But all the talk in the world was of no
avail. Another order might indeed have been given, and
as he saw an old sailor opposite to him—(Loud laughter,
as the attention of the House was directed
to the Solicitor-General)—there was some one
who, beside the Gallant Friend to whom he had
alluded, was able to judge of the propriety of the
objection alleged against this ship, and see how
impossible it was for the Captain of the Albion to obey
either it or the signal of which he had previously spoken.
One mode by which the true character of this ship might
have been ascertained was by bringing her and the Queen
into a hostile position with respect to each other. In
fact, to get them engaged. He did not mean that they
should fire shot at each other, but that they should fire
as if they were in action, and then it would be seen
which ship fired the fastest, and which kept up her firing
the best. There was another objection to the Albion,
if the report be true which had been made respecting
her. The Rodney, which was a two-decker, carrying
92 guns, carried her lower deck seven feet six inches
out of the water when at sea, and fully stored, while the
Albion, with only three months' provisions on board, and
with only a usual rate of stores, was only six feet nine
and a half inches out of the water, if the level of the
lower deck was to be taken as the guage. There were
two ways by which this level was to be ascertained, for
it would be recollected that the range of the outer port
was three inches more than that of the same propor-
tionate parallel within. He alluded to the deck floor-
ing. The way in which a guage of the height of a ship
out of the water was to be taken was by taking a batton
and laying it on a level with the port, and to measure
the distance between that and another batten laid
along the level of the water. By this measurement it
was ascertained that the height of the Albion could not
be so high as six feet six inches, But, when sailing,
the .Albion could not be so high as six feet six inches,
for he found by the builder's report that this was the
measurement which gave her height before she received
her guns. She had, therefore, at that time, 120 guns to
take in ; and he would leave the House to judge whether
the addition of this weight would not decrease the height of
her lower deck ports out of the water when she got to sea.
He now came to the consideration of sailing ships in
general. It appeared by the list which had been fur-
nished to him by the Admiralty, and which was now on
the table of the House, that, since 1830, five 120-
gun ships had been built, costing more than 3,000,0001.
The Queen cost 83,0001., the Trafalgar 87,0001., the
Royal William 76,0001., the Waterloo 72,0001., and the
St. George 79,0001. From this it would be seen that,
in proportion, the Queen was more expensive than any
of them. The Rodney, of 2,626 tons, cost 67,550/. ;
the Nile, of the same burden, 70,0001. ; the London, of
2,602 tons, 71,0001.; and the Albion, of ninety guns, and
a tonnage of 3,110 tons, 89,341/. When entirely fitted
up, the cost of the Albion would be immense. After
marking the cost of the Vanguard, the Thunderer, and
other vessels, the Gallant Commodore went on to say
that, since 1830, there had been constructed six three-
deckers of 120 guns, five of 110 guns, four of 90, three
of 84, four of 80, two of 70, three of 30, five of 36,
four of 44, six of 26, together with seventeen 16-gun
brigs. The whole cost of these, and other vessels,
amounted to 1,668,460/. He had one other observation
to make with respect to the Albion, which was, that
when she came into port, having been only a year out,
and but a short time at sea, her water waves and diminish-
ing plank were so open, that wood was obliged to be
driven in between her seams before she was coppered,
to such an extent that one hundred shipwrights and
apprentices were at work on her in Plymouth Dock-
yard for seven days, which was equivalent to seven
hundred men. He now came to a most impor-
tant question of naval construction, that of steam-boats.
Up to 1831 they had only a few steamers of low tonnage,
but in that year steam began to make a great progress,
and the Government found it absolutely necessary to do
something. At the time the Lord High Admiral was in
office, he (Sir C. Napier) took it on himself to write
him a letter on the subject, from which, if the House
would permit him, be would quote. He said, as it was
uncertain whether the various experiments then trying
would succeed, he should recommend a vessel 30 feet
wide, 150 long, and 18 deep. She ought not to be so
fine as a man-of-war, nor to carry so much fuel. She
should consume 22 tons of coals a day. The engines
and the boilers should be secured against shocks. He
recommended that the wheel should not be so broad as
usual ; and though in that case the vessel would not go
fast in the river Thames, it would, in rough weather, be
under complete command. Now he (Sir C. Napier) had
seen the Admiralty go on building, tor the last fifteen or
sixteen years, steamboats without any bottom at all, and
in which the engines and boilers were so exposed as to
be entirely unfit for war. When the Right Hon Baronet
came into office, he had, very much to his credit,
taken up steam. When Sir Thos. Hardy got into the
Admiralty, he naturally concluded that there would be
no difficulty in carrying out his views, but he bad been
disappointed, for the same system was continued. The
building of the steam vessels had cost the country
359,585/. ; the fitting-up and machinery nearly the same
amount. He did think that when they proceeded to lay
out such an enormous sum, they should have paid the
greatest possible attention to the construction of the vessels.
All those imperfections of which he complained in the
construction of man-of-war steamers, were attributable
to the surveyors of the navy, for they had been built
upon the principle applied to the construction of sailing
vessels, without any consideration of the great difference
that existed between the two classes of vessels. There
was also some blame attachable to the engineers ; but he
principally blamed the Board of Admiralty for not con-
sidering maturely the manner in which they should
have their war steamers constructed ; and he had no
hesitation whatever in saying, that not one of those war
steamers, after having cost all this money, was fit to take
her place as a man-of-war, or had in her construction
the smallest protection from an adversary. In fact, the
engines and beams that worked the engines were so
placed,' that the first shot fired into one of them from
an enemy's ship, would destroy both boilers and engines,
and blow her up. The beam that worked the engines
was on the top of the cylinder, so that the first shot
fired at it, would blow.up the ship. Whereas, if those
war steamers bad been built of a sufficient depth, and

dwthooeurbketnsbguiruontuetslhdaatbnedei:bryfoairleensrgasfi placed below the water, the
en
e;e andr iin
ti
hf
e the
e nßnotarryd
woof
ni Al d d
sma iy-
rally had so ordered the construction of them, he had no
it could be done. He also found that in the mode of
taking in coals, those vessels were equally defective, and
inconveniently contrived.—(Hear.) These observations,
he begged it to be understood, applied to corvettes, which
were commanded by commanders. He now came to an-
other class—namely, steam-frigates. The first he would
mention was the Gorgon, which cost the country 28,0001.
to construct ; yet she was 1,200 tons heavier than a 46-
gun sailing vessel; she had no means of firing guns from
her main-deck, so that if she should be chased by a supe-
rior vessel to-morrow, she had no means of using more
than one gun to defend herself. When this vessel was
put in the water it was found that she had this defect,
and then, indeed, it was said that she was never
intended to carry guns on her main deck. In answer
to that, all he would say was, that if she was so in-
tended, she could not carry them; and if she was not,
those who built her knew nothing about it.—(Hear and
laughter.) Well, the Board of Admiralty, having seen
their mistake in respect to this vessel, it was to be ex-
pected they would try to correct it in the next. But
what was their next step? The next vessel they built
was the Cyclops, which cost 27.0001. ; she, like the
y
Gorgon,
gnkwoh
ban,
saht.ade;s:
nahnhdreeeils
nnhnudegfe,
aoesobutfweerael
rdedina
ntesdshgr
not
eapoaaruot
tbshrul toacecsttwh,
carry
teere&nt
rrdhybccpe.
carry
orhrrcrnftgeofrw.
oaha.Cyclops
rHsf main-Gorgon.—(Hear,
deckmuabnernieadg,sri
t;
ooht guns,nieh achraoev.lcaulkedr),
e
muabat
npenieac:di
beautiful
yet,l
dfedaner
f
He had no hesitation in saying that if these vessels were
properly constructed, they would be able to fight two
guns at the head, two at the bow, two at the stern, and
two in the quarters. The tonnage of the whole of these
vessels was 12,872 tons, and the whole amount of cost
was 290,0221. There was the Firebrand, of 1,190 tons ;
the Gladiator, of 1,210 tons ; the Samson, of 1,299 tons ;
the Scourge, of 1,190 tons—all of them in the same
category with the steam corvettes that he had men-
tioned. Not one of them had any main-deck guns—not
one of them had ports fit for stern guns. It was, he
confessed, astonishing to him—he could not understand
how it was possible, when the Board of Admiralty had
plans and models laid before them of ships,
whether men-of-war or steam-ships, that they
could omit asking the constructor where were his bow-
guns, and where were his stern-guns. " I see your
drawings and your models, but I do not see a single ship
with two guns at its head or at its stern." He admitted
they had two bow-ports, but he should like to see the
man who could work them. It was almost, impossible to
do so. Certainly it could not be done with efficiency.
The last vessel constructed was the Retribution. She
was an enormous vessel, of 1,641 tong, being nearly as
large as their old line-of-battle ships. Now, would the
House believe it—she was to carry only one gun on a
pivot made for it. The necessity of carrying a few guns
never entered into the heads of those who built her, and,
instead ofcarrying her engines sufficiently low,she was even
more exposed than smaller vessels. Her paddles plunged
under water forty inches. She was without a single
gun on her main deck or on her stern. He was perfectly
assured that if she had been only 500 tons, she would
have been better than she was at present. As to main-
deck ports, they were not even thought of, and she
plunged most violently when she went to Chatham. He
would now come to the last ship of all, the Terrible.
which was built by Mr. Lang. She was a vessel of
1,840 tons, and was certainly the best steam-vessel in
the navy. After commencing with sharp-bottomed ves-
sels, the Admiralty were obliged to listen to the remon-
strances which were made ; and the Surveyor of the
Navy, who would not listen to any suggestions, instead
of acknowledging at once that sharp bottoms were not
fit for steamers, was gradually but slowly approaching
to the flat-bottom system. But would the House believe
that this large and superior vessel had only twelve guns
on the main-deck—six before and six abaft; and though
he admitted that they could put guns in her bows, it
would be impossible for any person to work them. She
had not a single stern gun on the main deck. He did
not know the number of steam-vessels cn the stocks, or
bow far advanced they were ; but whatever state they
were in, it was much better to pull them to pieces than
proceed with them in their present state. The money—
the enormous sums of money—expended in building
them, might as well be thrown to the winds. If they
went to war, they would find that steam-boats were no
more to the navy than cavalry were to the army. Two
cavalry regiments might as well be sent against one an-
other for an afternoon's amusement, as two steam-
boats. Their proper use was harassing the
enemy's rear, and how could they do that,
when they had no guns to point at them ?
He had seen them all with;his own eyes, and could speak
of the manner in which they had been designed. The
other use
.for steam-boats was to cover a retreat. If a
squadron were retreating, steam-boats would be found
useful to cover its rear, and if steam-boats were sent in
pursuit vessels of the same construction could best con-
tend with them, hut how could our steam-boats do so
when they had no guns pointed to the stern.
Sir G. COCKBURN—There are.
Sir C. NAPIER—On the main-deck?
Sir G. COCKSUAN—was silent.
Sir C. NAPIER proceeded. He had been told he looked at
the state of the navy with a jaundiced eye. Such was not the
case. He stated broad facts, which, upon inquiry, would be
found perfectly true. On the main-deck, he repeated, not one.
—k Hear, hear.) Let the members of the House of Commons
go down and view them, and they would at once see that the
guns could not be effectually worked on the main-deck, and if
they did not, after a careful inspection, agree with him, he
would never again talk about the navy. He was sorry for
having troubled the House at so much length, but felt it his
duty to do so. All he asked for was a Committee.—( Hear. )
Had they succeeded in their mode of ship-building ? If not, it
should be changed, and the best ascertained and acted upon ;
if they had, why let it be continued. He preferred asking for
a Commission to inquire into the whole system of naval con-
struction. But gentlemen better acquainted with the rules
and customs of the House were of opinion that this was
the more eligible mode, as by making it a money
question he had more hance of obtaining a Committee.
He did not care whether it was a Committee or a Commission
—they were now going to build a large number of steam-boats,
and he asked the House not to grant one shilling until the con-
dition of the steam navy (was fully and thoroughly inquired
into. He knew this was not a very palatable subject, though
from the manner in which the House had heard him, he had
no reason to think so ; but a sense of duty compelled him to
speak out the whole truth as he found it. He felt satisfied that
if the public press had not taken up the question of the state
of the navy in the manner it had done, it would have been use-
less for him to have attempted to bring the matter forward.
During the last twenty years, he had repeatedly called the at-
tention of those in power to the subject ; in fact, he had a large
book full of correspondence, but up to the present momen the
had never been able to get them to listen to a single suggestion
he had made.—(Hear, hear.) He had met with the greatest
courtesy from the Gallant Officer opposite. He had no party
feeling on this subject.—( Hear, hear.) He never introduced
his politics into naval inquiries—he was only guided by a sense
of what was due to the public, and only hoped to have the public
money advantageously expended. The House ought to grant
this Committee. He thought they were bound, out of regard
for the members of the present naval administration, and for
their predecessors, and in justice to the Surveyor of the Navy,
and to the First Lord of the Admiralty, to accede to his mo.
u.
prove then b e
The seen
he whether Gallant
would
Commodore
ou
mn theydmeor hadaokr
ee
t
sat down amid much cheering, having again thanked the House
.)
for the attention they had given him, and read the motion,
or
nlht Before
a d stated. awouldCommittee
which was as follows :—" A Select Committee to inquire into
lion.—(
been (libelled
e Hear,ver
y h
thingeaort h e
the manner in which the money voted since the year 1835 for
the construction of ships has been expended, and if the ships
constructed are an improvement of the old system."
Mr. HUME seconded the motion. The Hon. and Gallant
Officer had challenged inquiry—he (Mr. Hume) thought he
was entitled to it. He thought the country would not feel
satisfied unless a full and searching inquiry were made. He did
not think, however, the present time was as proper for inquiry
as on a previous occasion, when those great changes in the
naval condition of the country were made. He thought the
Right Hon. Baronet opposite had a great deal to answer for.
On the 29th of June, 1832, the Right Hon. Baronet used an
expression which had often been quoted, and which was still
fresh in his (Mr. Hume's) memory. He said that naval cap-
tains were more competent to fill the office of surveyors of the
navy than any other men, as much as to say that science was of
no use in the construction of ships. The present question was
one of the greatest importance in a national point of view. The
greatest commercial country in the world should have the most
powerful and effective engines at sea. England was then, and
had always been, very backward in the application of science to
ship-building. So defective was: the construetion of ships
during the war, that we were obliged to imitate
the construction of those French, Spanish, and even
Swedish and Danish vessels, which we captured.
Surely it was the British who should have set the example in
ship-building, seeing that not only our maritime and commer-
cial greatness depended upon our naval superiority, but even
our safety.--( Hear, hear.) The Hon, Gentleman then
quoted from the Tbird Report of the Commissioners appointed
to inquire into the affairs of the navy, which stated that naval
architecture had advanced to greater perfection, and been more
cherished among the French than among any other people ;
that little attention was paid to it in this country ; and that the
French employed men of the greatest talent and ability in the
construction of ships, whilst we contented ourselves with creep-
ing on in the dark,,in quest of such discoveries as chance might
throw in our way. In consequence of the recommendation of
a Committee, a school for naval architecture was established,
but, in 1832, the First Lord of the Admiralty abolished the
system, and the greatest injustice had been done to the mem-
bers of it, who were never allowed to fill those stations which
it was originally intended they should fill, and for which their
abilities qualified them. They had been taught algebra,
trigonometry, Auctions, the calculus, and, in short, the whole
system of mathematics, and were to have entered the most
subordinate offices in the navy, rising gradually to higher
offices as they merited. Such men would have been acquainted
not only with the whole system of naval tactics, but would have
been able to suggest improvements founded upon
their scientific and practical knowledge.—( Hear, hear. )
A great deal of money had been thrown away in remodelling
old ships—it would have been much cheaper to have built new
ones, than continually tinkering with those built upon an en-
tirely different construction. He first thought the Commission
preferable, he would most willingly assent to it, but he would
at all events second with much pleasure the motion of the
Hon. and Gallant Commodore.

Sir GEORGE COCKBURN said his Gallant Friend op-
posite had begun his statement by going so far back as the year
1806. Now it was not his ( Sir G. Cockburn's) intention to follow
him through the whole of that statement, nor would he be able
to do so if he were inclined, neither would be seek to defend
certain defects in vessels to which he had alluded. But this
he would beg of the Gallant Officer and the House to remem-
ber, that during a great portion of the time of which the Gallant
Officer had been speaking, the art of ship-building was by no
means so perfect as it had become of late.—( Hear, hear.) He
could not deny that the class of vessels which the Gallant
Officer had found fault with, were of a very bad description.
Forty-gun brigs had since been deemed unworthy ; they
had become bad by reason of the dry rot having got into them,
and many of them had been ordered to be cut down, and were
found to have made very excellent frigates. Whether this was
a prudent course or not, he would not pretend to say, but when
it was done there was nothing to prevent the authorities of
that day from taking that course. He would now come to the
charges which had been made against the Admiralty Board,
and he would wish to draw the attention of the House to the
first of those charges that applied to the present Board, be-
cause he did not feel that he was bound to defend the acts of
that Board before ho and his colleagues came into office.—
(Hear, hear.) He would begin, then, with the period when
he did come into office, and he would premise by requesting of
the House to consider the position in which he and his col.

leagues were placed at that time, in reference to the Navy
Board, and particularly in reference to their position with Sir
William Symonds. —( Hear, hear.) Every one was aware of
the feeling that existed in regard to that gentleman ; and,
therefore, if the first act of the new Board was to stop all the
ships then in course of building under the direction of Sir
William Symonds, would it not be said that he had not been
treated as he deserved.--( Hear.) Many of the most excellent
and valued officers in the navy considered that that officer had
done the navy and the service very great benefit.--( Hear. )
But the Gallant Officer opposite and the House should recollect
that when he ( Sir G. C.) came into office, the Queen, with
which the Gallant Officer had found so much fault, was in pro-
gress of being built, and when she was completed, the Admi-
ralty Board sent her to sea, in order to try her power.—
( Hear.) She went to the Mediterranean ; and the next the
Board heard of her was, that she was a very excellent ship, and
that she had the advantage of all the other vessels of the same
class, except the Vanguard. That vessel had also been ordered
by Sir William Symonds; and he ( Sir G. C.) would ask,
would it have been just in the Board when they came in to have
stopped her ?—( Hear.) But here let him say, in defence of
the present Admiralty, that when they did come in, they re-
solved not to build any more until those in progress should
have been completed and tried—( Hear)—and when they had
heard of the sort of vessel the Albion was, they stopped the
further building of all the others.---( Hear.) When he ( Sir
G. C.) came into office, the Admiralty Board, without mean-
' ing the slightest disrespect to Sir W. Symonds, or to question his
merits in the least, resolved to form a committee of all the
most talented masters of ships, to whom they gave directions
to report to them upon the best mode of arming the sterns and
prows of those vessels.—( Hear. ) That report was made, and
laid before the Surveyor-General of the Board, and he cer-
tainly did differ from much that it contained.—( Hear.) With
regard to the Queen being so defe tive as the Gallant Officer
opposite had stated, he (Sir G. C.) begged to say that the rea-
son she was put into dock and altered was, because the surveyor
had stated that the reason she was so defective was because she
required those alterations, and, therefore, she got them.
In the meantime the Admiralty Board did the best they could
to remedy any other defective vessels, and with this view they
had selected three of the best naval architects they could find
to examine all the other vessels said to be defective, to report
upon their faults, and to take care that those faults should be
avoided in all future vessels.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
mean to say that the officers employed by the present Board
of Admiralty were superior to those they had succeeded, aad
it was but fair of him to say that Sir W. Symonds was inferior
to none of them.—( Hear, hear.) He ( Sir G. Cockburn)
should, at the same time, say that Mr. White had shown very
superior qualifications in his office, and had done one of the
most extraordinary feats in improving a vessel, that,
perhaps, had ever been heard of. The Board had
picked out a 42-gun ship, and cut off her bows,
and Mr. White was employed to put new bows to her,
and in this he had succeeded so well, that the vessel, upon
being sent out on trial, performed her voyage without letting
in any water, which was a very desirable perfection.—( Hear,
hoar.) Again, he would say, that the Board deserved credit
for not doing anything likely to wound the feelings of Sir W.
Symonds, by being in too great a hurry to upset the works
they found going on when they came into office.—(Hear,
hear.) In the meantime, if the Admiralty should find that
defects existed in the Albion and the Queen, and the other
vessels on the stocks, care would be taken that they should be
made good ships of.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to what had
been said by an Hon. Member, in reference to shipwrights'
apprenticeship, the Board had resolved to pay every attention
to that subject also. It had been observed that the whole of
this subject ought to be referred to a Committee of the House
of Commons. Now, he begged to say, that his impression
was, that such a Committee would be the very worst authority
to which such a subject could he referred. He could assure the
Gallant Officer and the House that the Admiralty Board would
take up the subject, and bestow upon it all tho attention in
their power, and devote their best energies towards remedy.
in, all defects ; and if they were found to be incompetent
to do so, then it would be their duty to resign their office to
the Gallant Officer opposite, or to any one else whom the
House and the country might deem better fitted to discharge
their duties.—( Hear, hear.) Then, with regard to what had
been said by the Gallant Officer about sailing-ships ; the Gal-
lant Officer could not be more anxious to avoid defects in those
vessels also, than the Navy Board ; but to those vessels also
the same observations applied as to the steam-vessels, namely,
that most of them had been contracted for before the present
Board came into office.—( Hear, hear.) The present Board
had no intention to put guns on the main-deck of war-
steamers, for if they were fitted up with guns, it would ma-
terially retard their progress. His impression was that those
vessels should have their guns so disposed of as to enable
them, when they took their stations, to fire upon the enemy
with perfect impunity.--( Hear.) He did not approve of
putting too many guns in those vessels, for it was
of vast importance that they should be kept at their
proper work.—( Hear, hear.) The Admiralty were now en-
gaged in building some iron vessels, and they had made it a
sine qua non with the contractors, that each of these vessels
should have the power of firing two guns on her main.deck
forward, and two aft.—( Hear, hear.) He did not know that
it would be necessary for him to detain the House any longer;
but, in conclusion, he would say that he knew what the
strength of the French navy was, and he knew what that of
England was, and he was happy to be in a position to state
that the naval force of England was much better and larger
than that of France, notwithstanding all that had been said to
the contrary. —( Hear, hear. )
Captain ROUS conceived that the navy and the country
were greatly indebted to the Hon. and Gallant Member who
had introduced this subject to the House.--( Hear, hear. )
He would also admit that the Han. Baronet on the Treasury
Bench had done good service to the country by upsetting
the Royal Naval College.—(Hear, hear.) As to what
had been said about vessels built with round sterns,
there appeared to have been at one time a mania
for constituting vessels in that way, and millions of money
were thus expended, and it could not have been more uselessly
employed. He had commanded a corvette, and other vessels, so
built, and he could say that not a vessel in the service with a
round stern could fire a stern gun, because the muzzle of
the gun could never be brought sufficiently close to the port.
—( Hear, hear.) And yet he felt satisfied that nearly one-
eighth of the national debt had been incurred by building
vessels on this defective plan.—( Hear, hear.) Yet the same
bad system was going on, and the result would be that those
vessels never could go to sea.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Member next alluded to abuses existing in the practices of the
dock-yard officers; for when the Admiralty Board ordered a
report of the defects of a vessel, a sum nearly double that ne-
cessary was always set forth in the report as that re-
quisite for the purpose, and the Admiralty had no possible
means of knowing whether it was too much or too little.
He merely mentioned these facts, because he thought no
surveyor ought to be allowed to build models until they had
been certified by a scientific man.--( Hear, hear.) Premiums
should be given to the gentleman who produced the best model,
and the field for supplying them thrown open to competition.
If they wanted to build steamers, let them go to the builder of
the Great Britain, or Mr. Napier, and not confine themselves
to gentlemen brought up in the royal dockyards, whose educa-
tion was generally very circumscribed. He had commanded
every species of brig-corvette, and ho could say, without fear
of contradiction, that none of them were fit to go to sea. They
might be splendid vessels, but really he never could discover any
remarkable beauty about them. What he had been saying for
the last ten or twelve years, he was still compelled to repeat, be
it ever so tedious or unpleasant. He had remarked, and every
other good seaman who went before him had done the same,
that Sir William Symonds' ships were total failures. His first
vessel was the Flying Fish, and everybody connected with the
navy was aware of its utter inefficiency for hard ser-
vice, or, in fact, service of any sort. Their three-deckers
were failures, solely because they made them without flat floors.
Yet the Admiralty still persisted in building them without this
appendage, an act of which he had often heard it said, no man
in his sober senses would be guilty. Sir William Symonds'
first frigate, he admitted, was a magnificent ship. She
had some remarkably fine points about her, but
she was exceedingly sharp in the water, and in
many other respects defective. But perhaps some of Sir
Wm. Symonds' friends would say he had introduced improve-
merits of late. Now, he weseaprepared to assert that the Snake,
which he built a short time back, was equally as bad a ship--
having the same defects as the Flying Fish, which he built so
far back as ten years ago. He was conscious of the defects in
these ships when he held a post in her Majesty's service, but it
would have been a source of great annoyance as well as incon-
venience to him if he had ventured to speak his mind upon the
subject then. The Admiralty appeared to look upon a confes-
sion of this sort as a personal reflection upon them, and this de-
terred many of her Majesty's officers from speaking their
minds on the subject. They were identified with Sir William
Symonds, and no doubt had determined to sink or swim with him.
Ten years had however elapsed, since the time he spoke of, but
little or no change had taken place. Certainly, the Administration
had changed,but their successors had unfortunately been upwards
of three years making up their minds as to the merits of one
of Sir William Symonds' frigates. They had been all this
while endeavouring to discover if she was a fast vessel, and yet
they had not come to any decision. But the cause of this was
plain enough. If, when he was in the service, he had been
sent out to Malta with a ship, with specific orders to report
upon her sailing upon a magnificent breeze, what would have
become of him if he had reported unfavourably? IVhy, he
would have been plain Mr. Rous at this moment, instead of
Captain Rous.—(Laughter.) Sir William Symonds' ships
had, from this very reason, been described as superior vessels
in every respect. He did not wish to be understood as finding
fault with Sir W. Symonds, because he was quite aware that it
was by the direction of the Admiralty that he expended
millions in the building of these defective ships. Nor was it
his fault that the vessels were defective. lie was not brought
up to the profession of a ship-builder, and was by no means a
scientific man. But why could not the Admiralty decide at
once upon the merits of the Queen? The answer he had
was, "there is no wind." " What, no wind ?" At one time
he was sure it was plentiful, but now they had a difficulty of
finding a good breeze between the West Indies and Lisbon.—
( Laughter.) It really was too bad. Here had they been
three years trying this model, anti still they had not come to a
decision, nor were they likely to arrive at any in another
three years. He was as anxious as any one to
know the truth, and he was confident, if they
would give proper directions, a gale of wind would very soon
be found.--( Hear, hear, and laughter.) With respect to the
future, what the Admiralty wanted, was an active man like
Sir W. Symonds, for he certainly was an active man, to in-
spect what was going on in the dockyards.—( Hear, hear. )
This would put an end to the present waste and lavish ex-
penditure. Sir William Symonds would be a useful man to
them in this way, but if they allowed him to lay down his
lines and build ships upon them, the defects complained of
would never be remedied. Let him lay down other men's
lines if they would, and then there would be a pos-
sibility of his building an efficient seaworthy vessel.
He had little more to remark, but, at all events,
whether the Hon. and Gallant Commodore succeeded with his

motion or not, he was sure it would be productiveorfe
great
public benefit.—( Hear, hear.) He wouldexpeeted_i_tougethan his. receive
more support from the other side of the H
There was much more public spirit on the Opposition
r
tho navy had always look( d upon them as
n thatand
House. lf, in his warmth, ho had
feelingsgiven their
of any member
utterance to any
expression calculated to hurt the
hecould only express
his regret for it.
of the Board of Admiralty,atliora_.y
took a great interest
the service, because he would not
countenance the principle e
n
left
which had guided the Board, and he
need hardly say he still felt as deeply on the matter.
Mr. C. WOOD did not think this discussion would
be productive of any great advantage to the navy,
nor an inquiry would produce those
beneficial results
he believe
results which some Hon. and Gallant Members
seemed to anticipate. He must say the subject was so en-
tangled with technicalities that it was quite impossible for the
House to comprehend it. It would be quite unintelligible to
most Hon. Members, and for this reason, he could not agree
to the motion. But the Hon. and Gallant Commodore had
advanced little or nothing to justify an inquiry being insti-
tuted. The Hon. and Gallant Gentleman related the ex-
perience he had had since 1800 down to 1830, and he con-
demned every class of vessels but the 120 gun-ships as being
utterly useless. The 74 and the 154-gun ships he pronounced
were useless; the 36 and 28-gun frigates were little better. The
18-gun brigs and 16-gun sloops were defective, and, in fact,
he condemned them all down to the ten-gun sloops. But the
whole and sole object of the attack was Sir William Symonds,
and of course the eight or nine classes of vessels built by that
gentleman were all :defective. One Hon. Gentleman, how-
ever,
admitted that the Vernon answered perfectly well, and
the twenty-six-gen ships and sixteen-gun brigs were ex-
ceedingly beautiful. All the ships which had been built on
Sir William Symonds' principle, since le+3s, bad been uni-

venally approved by the officers of the navy. The Hon. and
Gallant Officer (Sir C. Napier) had himself admitted that
there was a considerable difference between the bow of Sir
William Symonds' last ship and that of his first. Why, this
at least proved that he was ready to adopt any improvements
which were calculated to benefit the service.—( Hear.) With
regard to the Queen, the Hon. and Gallant Officer said
that six Queens were laid down by order of the late Board of
Admiralty. He did not think that statement was quite borne
out. This vessel was launched in 1639; and for the first
three years all the reports with regard to her were extremely
favourable. The Hon. and Gallant Officer bad made many
assertions on the subject ; whether he was warranted er not
in his assertions, he could not say; but the official documents
were so much in favour of the Queen, that four other vessels of
the same character had been laid down, and though they had
since been stopped, he maintained that the documents justified
the Board in the course which they pursued. With regard to
the Albion, although the Hon. and Gallant Officer said that
she was not able to fire her guns, the report stated that she
was a very stiff ship and sailed better than any other in the
squadron.--( Hear, hear.) The fifty-gun frigate, the
twenty-six-gnu frigate, and the eighty-gun ship had
each received favourable testimony from the Hon. and
Gallant officer himself ; and he had read a most favourable
report of the 110-gun ship and the 90-gun ship whilst in the
Mediterranean. Each class had, in fact, received his ap-
proval. Yet, after condemding universally every class of ships
built before 1835, he now called on the House to condemn
the Board of Admiralty for their conduct with respect to ships
whose mode of construction had received from him the most
favourable testimony which it was possible for ships to receive.
—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the question of expense, it
certainly appeared to be established that a clear
saving had been effected. He really did not know
on what earthly ground the motion was to be sup-
ported. With regard to the steamers he would only re-
mark that at the time when he (Mr. C. Wood) left the
Admiralty, all the steamers constructed were more or less
experimental. He did not think, in fact, that it was possible
at present for any person to give a clear and decided opinion
either as to the effect which steam navigation would have, or
the best mode of arming and constructing steam-vessels.—
( Hear.) Some time must elapse before any opinion could be
formed. The whole system of steam navigation was in a
course of experiment ; and feeling confident that no effort
would be spared by the Board of Admiralty to do all that was
necessary for the safety and security of the country in any future
war, he would willingly leave the question in their hands.
Admiral BOWLES said he should not have risen but for
the allusion made to himself by the Hon. and Gallant Officer
who had introduced this subject, and also by the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member for Westminster. The complaint made against
him by these two Hon. Members was, that he did not find a
gale of wind, or stay out to meet it. That he did not find it,
was certainly not his own fault.—( Laughter.) sVhy he
should stay out at the risk of injuring valuable masts and in-
curring a damage of several thousand pounds, merely to have
bad weather, he could not possibly conceive.—( Hear, hear. )
He was surprised to hear old sailors talk in such a manner.
With regard to the Albion, he must say that he believed when
at sea she would not be found to roll more than other
ships of the same class.—( Hear, hear.) As to her not fight-
ing her guns when other ships would do so, he believed that
any apprehension on that subject would turn out to be un-
founded. As far as it was safe to hazard an opinion with re-
spect to the Queen, he would state that it was his conviction,
that when tried again, after a few alterations, she would be
found a safe and fast-sailing vessel. He could not conclude
without taking that opportunity of reminding the House what
a debt of gratitude they owed to the members of the Yacht
Club, who, having devoted themselves to the truly British
amusement of yacht sailing, had, from their position
and influence, exercised a very beneficial influence
upon the improvement of naval architecture. Two
amongst those gentlemen deserved special honour and
respect. One of them was Lord Vernon, who unhappily had
not survived to witness the benefit of those improvements to
which he had so greatly contributed ; the other was the Duke
of Portland.----( Hear, hear.) Before Sir William Symonds was
allowed to build his first ship, the Columbine, Lord Vernon
actually gave his personal guarantee to the Admiralty that in
the event of failure he would defray the whole expense. He
thought that such persons were well entitled to the gratitude of
the whole country. With respect to Sir William Symonds, he
believed that the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State
for the Home Department never did greater service to the
country than by appointing him to the office which he ao wor-
thily filled; and with whatever calumnies and misrepresentations
he might be assailed, he felt convinced when Sir W. Symonds
retired from office, he would have the proud satisfaction of
knowing that he had contributed, perhaps, more than any other
officer in the British navy, to the improvement of that branch
of the public service.—( Cheers. )
Capt. PECHELL said that, however good the construction
of the ships might be, still there was reason to complain of the
mode in which they were tried. He fully concurred in the
praise accorded to Sir Wm. Symonds ; but that was altogether
a different question from the one raised by his Honourable
and Gallant Friend. He could not help complaining
that when a ship of the old construction had been im-
proved in her bow, and made a most valuable vessel,
in the last year, she was sent to the Gallant Admiral then in
command on the Irish station, and for nine months she lay in
the Shannon, to assist in the collection of the poor-rates.—
( Laughter.) He had observed the experiment with greatanx.
iety, and the result was that he was convinced of the efficiency
of the Rattler. He hoped that, whatever determination the
Government came to with respect to the employment of the
Archimedian screw, and the ordinary paddles, they would look
carefully to the experiments that had been made.
Mr. CURRIE said the Government had looked with
great anxiety to all the experiments, and they were
desirous of adapting, to the naval service of the coun-
try, the machinery which would be most effective.
During the three years in which the present Government had
held office they had done everything in their power to pro-
mote improvements in this department of the public service.
In the very case of the Vanguard it was quite evident that they
were not disposed to deal hastily or rashly. He agreed with
the Hon. and Gallant Member that the Vanguard had borne
out the expectations which had been entertained of her.
Capt. HARRIS thought it was his duty, as a member of the
naval profession, to thank the Gallant Commodore for having
brought this subject under the consideration of the House. A
good deal had been said about the building of ships, but it was
much easier to point out objections than to show how they
were to be built. He did not think the Gallant Commodore
would gain the object he had in view, even if his motion were
carried ; but he was of opinion that there ought to be some in-
quiry into the subject, and that a Commission should be ap-
pointed.—( Hear, hear.) He did not think that the Admiralty
could give, with the other duties they had to perform, sufficient
attention to the subject. He approved of a great deal of what
Sir Wm. Symonds had done, though he had failed in some
things. With regard to the armament of frigates, he thought
it was a fault not to suit the weight of metal to the quantity of
timber. For instance, there were the Winchester, and the
Pique, two frigates now in commission. The former was
of 1,636 tons, and had thirty-six guns of 32-pounders.
The latter was of 1,436 tons, being 200 less than the other,
and she carried 52 guns of a smaller calibre, and any person,
upon referring to the naval history of the country, would see
that where the number of guns and their weight were proper-
tioned to the timber of the vessel, she was more effective than
when that proportion was not kept up. The same was observ-
able with regard to the Carnatic and the Belvidere. The
former was a 26-gun ship of 32-pounders, and of 900 tons ;
the latter carried 42 guns, making a difference of 16 guns,
while there was only a difference of 35 in the tonnage. He
looked with satisfaction to the efforts which were now making
to increase the naval force and steam navigation of the country.
Mr. WAKLEY said that the House ought to be indebted
to his Hon. and Gallant Friend for bringing this motion before
the House. He was entitled to its gratitude, and whether he
failed or not, his labours en this question would entitle hiM to,
and he would receive the gratitude of, the publics That anti-
ject had been discussed almost ever since he had a seat in th e
House, and it was always made a sham question by official
persons on both sides of the House. It was now time that the
subject should be seriously considered, for it was one in which
the public took the greatest possible interest. The navy was
the favourite service of the people of England, and no man
would refuse his share of any reasonable expenses to keep it
in an efficient state. His Hon. and Gallant Friend
had shown, in his own and peculiar language, that several ships
had been seriously damaged, but there was one vessel, called
The Admiralty,"—(Laughter)—which he did not believe
would recover from the damage it had received on this occa-
sion, unless those who manned it made inquiries how so Much
money had been wasted in building ships which were declared
to be not fit for service. Wbat had been said by the Hon. and
Gallant Member for Westminster had perfectly astonished him.
He said that ships had been built in the dock-yards, which
cost a tenth—he said it first, and then an eighth—of the
national debt, in building ships which had never gone to Sea,
and were never fit to go to sea. Ho said that that statement
perfectly astonished him, coming as it did from the Hon. and
Gallant Captain, who had rendered such great services to 'his
country—whose name would be respected wherever it was
known—who always spoke his mind freely, and said what he
thought on every subject to which he gave his attention. The
allegations and arguments he put forward would make their
impression out of doors, whatever might be their effect in that
House; but he ( Mr. Wakley) was one of those who thought
that the appointment of a Committee was not suitable to the
emergency. He did nut think that it would lead to any prac-
tical result, for there were none in that House who understbod
the subject except naval officers, and they, perhaps, would
be jealous of each other, and there might be a powerful firing
of broadsides on each side of the table if they alone were to
compose the Committee. The Hon. and Gallant Captain said
he did not believe the Lords of the Admiralty would know one
ship from another, or scarcely a three-decker from a New-
castle collier.—(Laughter.) If that were the case with
respect to Lords of the Admiralty, how much worse with those
who had no connexion with naval matters. The Hon. Gen-
tleman the Secretary to the Admiralty, who had been pro-
moted from a Lord to a Secretary, had sought permission
which he could not very well understand, to
have those things left with them. Why these
things had been left to the Admiralty long enough. The
Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Halifax, got up and spoke in
defence of the existing Board. Why, to be sure he did. He
had been Secretary to the Admiralty himself. There was always
an understanding between the official ins and outs.--
(Laughter.) He did not mean to fay that there was any re-
gular compact between them, but the thing was understood.
eunderstood
This subject was too important to be understood to be gut rid
of in this way, after the statement made by officers who had ob-
tained so
the glory o
would require a full, a complete, and a searching
mufch this renown,
country. and
The Hon. and Gallant Captain had alluded to
whose
theohseenna m s werepublic identical
the experiments made by the vessels built under Sir William
subject,Sym on st, ey
investigation.but he omitted to remark that the vessels which he
built, and were put uponitheir trial, had not their full comple-
ment of stores and water, so that the vessels did not draw 'se
t steamers,i rst Lord
and of the
h e
much water as if they had their full complement, and, there-
fore
Admiralty, the experiment
addressed
thewasHouse nootceornp
walhet regard a r
heard, for the first time, that they were to give such enormous
sums for building steam-vessels which were only to carry three
or four guns, two in ',their bows and two in their stern. lirte
that to be the case ? Why, supposing such steamers were to
encounter those that had broadsides and
the condition of their steamers?—( Hear.) Such was the idea
which this country had of war-steamers. He had heard a naval
officer state that the application of steam to ships would change
the whole naval tactics of this country. The Hon. Gentleman
on the other side of the House had laid great stress on what
had been said by a foreign Admiral. Why, was it not
natural that he should wish to increase the naval power of
his own country ? It was of course his object to make the
naval power of this country appear as small as possible.—
( Laughter, and cries of " No, no.") He looked through the
large end of the telescope, and saw our navy as small as he
could.—(Laughter.) Yes, he looked through the large end of
the telescope, and saw the nary of tide country under the
smallest aspect possible.—( Laughter, and cries of " That is not
what you mean.") He looked through the large end, and saw
our navy as small as he could.—( Continued laughter, and
cries of " Try back.") He begged pardon; Hon. Gentlemen
were right, and he was wrong. What he meant to say was,
that the foreign officer saw the navy of this country in its re al
magnitude; his own:but he misrepresented its power in
country. He represented it as. much as poss.
making it appear larger than it really . was,- 115
-
to induce his own country to
exhibit
all their national
to compete with
make exertions so a 5
energy—te
this country is. the time of war.but Now, he could place no re-,
it was the duty, the especial,
duty of Englishmen, fiance on sueli-a•statetrne
lnoo4k to that force, which must bejtheie
ecurity and the great o
pillar of their protection. —( Hear, heir.)