§ SIR EDWARD REEDasked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether it is true that Her Majesty's ship "Inflexible," which was originally proposed to Parliament at an estimated cost (for hull only) of £401,000, had actually cost, in March 1879, £632,680, and, in the terms of a Report of the Accountant General of the Navy, was "still reported incomplete (in February 1881), with a total expenditure for labour and material of £714,927;" and why, in view of these facts, the estimated total cost of the hull is given in the Navy Estimates of the present year as £590,013?
§ MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI propose to lay on the Table a Return showing the details of the cost of Her Majesty's ship Inflexible, and other particulars regarding her. In the meantime, in answer to the Question of my hon. Friend, I have to say that the first and last figures quoted by him—namely, £401,000, as the original estimated cost of the hull only, and £590,013 as the estimated total cost of the hull, stated in this year's Estimates, are correct. The actual expenditure on the hull, as shown in the Expense Account for 1881, I may add, is £589,481. The excess of cost over the original Estimate is due to many causes, which will be set forth in the Return to be presented. The other figures are also correctly quoted from 1600 the documents to which my hon. Friend refers, and represent the progress of the general expenditure on the ship, including, besides the cost of the hull, payments to contractors for machinery, and everything else connected with the ship. The total cost of the Inflexible, as shown in the Dockyard Expense Account presented this year, is £809,594, and the House will understand the nature of the margin by which this sum exceeds the cost of the hull when I mention two of the items composing it—namely, £125,000 for propelling machinery, and £48,000 for hydraulic gun machinery.