The New York herald., 1870-04-30
The American and Rngiish Navios.

There must be defect in the organization
OF our Congress, inasm1ch as the different
branches OF the service in this country are not
so we'll represented on the committees by we'll
posted members as the corresponding branches
| in England are in the Houses Of Parliament
The difference Is more particularly seen in the
naval committees, which in England are com
posed OF professional experts, who are pre-
pared at moments notice to answer any
attack on the navy or to give any required in
| formation. II is seldom that we find, either in
the Senate or House Of Representatives, man
fully posted in regard to naval matters or in
accord with the Navy Department Most Of
the members are antagonistc, or at least ara
indisposed to pay much attention, to the requi-
sitions made upon them from naval quarters
Now and then such q man as Senator Grimes
may be found, who, like Mr.. Childers, Of the
British House of Commons, can get up on the
floor and fight the navy supplies through, or
propose something for the benefit Of the SER
vice without fear Of defeat; but Senator Grimes
acquired his knowledge Of the service through
long years Of patient study into its workings.
and by his intimate associations with the chiefs
of bureaus and other principal officers Of the
navy, who looked to him for that support the
service has always needed.
Any member may get up in Congress and
abuse the navy to his hearts content without
any reason In the world, making the most
eeregious errors In figures, and fear no contra
| diction. In most instances the mi,statements
are believed, and are the signal for applying the
pruning knife and looping off the most i'm
portant estimates for the support Of the navy,
without regard to the recommendations OF
the heads Of bureaus, who have spent months
of toll in carefully shaping these estimates to
suit the wants Of the service This was seen
| in the case of Mr.. Cox. when he attacked the
navy lately on the floor Of Congress, and, after
abusing everything connected with the service,
| be produced an array of figures that, If cor
| rect, would prOye an intolerable amount Of
| extravagance against the department.. 1t is
needless to say that these figures were all
wrong and no more stated the actual ex
penditures of the navy than they did anything
else yet there was not man on the floor Of
Congress who could answer them. Those who
desired to refute Mr. Cox's statements were
not able to do 80 for want of present infor-
nation, which it is presumed they could have
obtained by going to the Navy Department,
and in consequence of this MIR. Cox's figures
were no doubt swallowed by those who desired
to believe them.
Thus we see the necessity Of having some
one in the naval committees of both Houses
who will always be ready with the naval
budget to explain the truth to members when
they get up on the floor of Congress and
make assertions not founded on fact. What
does Mr.. Cox care for the interests of service
that gives him no votes and cannot put dime
in his pocket? There should, however, be
some few men among the great body of Con-
gross who have patriotism enough to try and
save the great bnlwark of the nation from
the injuries inflicted by ignorant pretenders.
When the navy estimates for the year end
ing March 81, 1871, were presented to the
British House Of Commons 1t was refreshing
to see the manner in which Mr.. Chiders got
mp ON the floor and explained to the House item
| by item, until the whole amount (of sixty mil
| lions of dollars in our currency was voted
through in spite of the most vigorous attacks
| by the opposition.
| In this connection il may not be amiss
to review the present policy of the British
! government with regard to its navy, as
there are matters which few people in this
| country understand as the majority form
| their opinions from the senseless outcries
| of few noisy radicals on the floor of Con-
| gress, and consider that the navy is really an
! encumbrance-much larger than the nation
requires. and conducted at an enormous ex-
pense. The general results Of the last few
years Of British naval ship building are as fol-
| lows Two first class iron -clads. six second
class iron-cads, nine third class IRON clads and
eighteen ordinary iron-clads, all Of which are
heavy seagoing broadside ships. OF first
class turret ships there are two of the Thun-
derer class, five of the Monarch class, two Of
the Royal Sovereign class, besides five smaller
broadsides and two turret ships-a total of
ffty-one ships. These are vessels any one Of
| which could drive all our wooden ships from
the ocean, and they carry five hundred and
eighty-fve heavy guns.
The policy Of increase in the British navy
is to build twenty thousand tons Of iron ships
every year, which will give Great Britain an
annual addition of four FIRST class iron vessels
until the number Of sixty heavy iron-clads Is
reached, which, with large force of wooden
vessels, will give q navy capable Of contending
with those of France and the United States al
the same time. The policy with regard to the
dockyards is twelve thousand men on the ter
hour system, and sixty-one thousand seamer
and marines for service adoat. All the IRON
clads this year are kept ready for sea, and all
the troopsMps and one hundred and sixty
one unarmored ships either in commission or