ORDNANCE ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 24 September 1841)

§ Captain Boldero
said that the present ordnance estimates which he rose to move had been prepared by the late Board of Ordnance, and authorised by the late Master-general. It was a legacy which had been left to them by their predecessors, and they had thought it their duty neither to augment nor decrease them. Under the first head of ordnance works and repairs in the United Kingdom, there was an item of 2,000l. for a steam-engine of twelve-horse power, which was to be erected at Woolwich for the purpose of boring the brass cannon in the foundry there, which had been hitherto done by horse power. The application of a steam-engine had been 803 the idea of an ingenious and talented man, bearing the same name as the gallant and distinguished hero opposite (Sir C. Napier), and he had the satisfaction of informing the House that it would effect a saving to the country of 400l. a year. Another item, it would be seen, was for repairs at the powder mills at Waltham Abbey. Some time since the works had given way, and the manner in which the works were being repaired was such as would effect a great saving, would enable them to manufacture a superior powder, and what was most important of all, would diminish the liability to loss of life. There was likewise an item of two thousand pounds for storekeeper's expenditure, that was occasioned by the pressure of labour in the Royal Arsenal, owing to the shipment of heavy stores to China, the Mediterranean, and Canada; but a portion of the extra men employed had been already discharged, and the remainder would be in the course of a few months. The next head of expenditure was for services in Canada; and the different items of expense had been incurred by order of the commander of the provinces for the purpose of affording additional accommodation for the troops, and of repairing barracks rendered necessary by the late rebellion. The hon. and gallant Member concluded by moving a vote of' 24,772l. for ordnance works and repairs: in the United Kingdom, which was carried.

Mr. Williams
said, that he wished for some explanation as to an item of 25,000l. for the purchase of land, near Kingston. What was the land for? And what made it of such extraordinary value?

§ Captain Boldero
said, that these votes had been sanctioned by the Lords of the Treasury. He believed that some time ago a committee had been appointed, composed of some of the most scientific officers in the service, to consider the best method of improving the military defence of our colonies; that committee had recommended that at Kingston certain redoubts should be constructed, and if the hon. Member turned to the ordnance estimates, he would find a sum of 270,000l. for the purpose of erecting batteries and redoubts at Kingston; already they had built one casemated redoubt, capable of holding 350 men, for 70,000l. In June 804 last, there had been a further recommendation, sanctioned by the Duke of Wellington, to purchase a certain portion of land, for the purpose of building fresh forts, and that had been done. Recently, by Act of Parliament, Kingston had been made the capital of the United Provinces, and land there had consequently increased very much in value, so that it had been found impossible to purchase it at a lower price.

Mr. Williams
said, that he was quite satisfied that there was no land near Kingston which was worth anything like the price that had been paid for this.

§ Captain Boldero
said, that the land in question was very desirable for building leases, and the proprietors of the soil would not sell it under the price that had been paid for it.

§ Mr. Aglionby
said, this he supposed was one of the blessings of colonies—to have to pay 272,000l. for fortifying them. He thought it was paying extremely dear for such a blessing.

Mr. Williams
had great reluctance in allowing this vote to pass without a division; and if the present Ministers had been at all responsible for those estimates, he certainly should have taken the sense of the House upon it.

§ Sir Charles Napier
said, that he should take this opportunity of again addressing the right hon. Baronet on the propriety of reconsidering the manner in which the Board of Ordnance was at present constructed. When he mentioned this subject on a former occasion, he was told that it was not customary always to appoint a naval officer on that Board; but of this he was convinced, that the duties of the Board could not be properly performed without an officer of the navy belonging to it; he therefore was anxious to press upon the right hon. Baronet the propriety of making such an appointment. He was not arguing this from any factious motive, but from a thorough conviction that the duties of the Board, so far as the navy was concerned, could not be properly discharged, nor the naval service be well-conducted, unless one of the members of the Board belonged to the navy. So long ago as the year 1830, he addressed a letter to a very distinguished naval officer re- 805 lative to the manner in which the navy was equipped. It was just previous to his right hon. Friend, the Member for Dorchester (Sir James Graham), being made First Lord of the Admiralty. In that letter he stated, that the ordnance supplies made to the ships with which he had been professionally connected, were of the worst kind, that many of the muskets went off half-cocked, many would not go off at all, and that the comparison, "as bad as a ship's musket," was quite proverbial. Other things were quite as bad as the muskets, and he at that time stated, that as long as the present system stood, the evil he complained of could not be corrected; for, as the navy was not represented at the Board of Ordnance, everything relative to that branch of the public service was allowed to stand still. When Earl Grey came into office, he saw the impropriety of not having a naval officer constantly at the Board, and he appointed his late gallant friend, Captain Duncan, a member. No man could give a better description of Captain Duncan's ability to discharge his duty, and of the great benefit derived by the Board of Admiralty from that gallant officer's experience, than his right hon. Friend, the Member for Dorchester, who was at the head of the Admiralty at that time. When Lord Melbourne came into power, and formed his Administration, he committed a great error in not appointing a naval officer to the Board of Ordnance. He presumed it to have arisen from political causes, as in the present case; but Lord Melbourne soon saw and corrected his error, by appointing the gallant Member for Greenwich (Captain Dundas), and another gallant Officer, (Captain Berkeley), to the Board. But the Board has again been reconstructed, and at the present moment, no officer connected with the navy belonged to it. This gave him great reason to fear that all the improvements which had been brought forward by those gallant officers whom he had named, would fall into disuse, and that the Board would get back to the old and bad system. When he was employed on the coast of Syria, and it became necessary to use firearms, a great number of the muskets that were brought forward, were utterly unfit for service. The mountaineers themselves refused to take our arms, because they were so bad. He wished the right hon. Baronet, who had a son in the navy, 806 would send for that youngster, who, he understood, was a very fine young man, and ask his opinion about the matter, and what he would think of having a useless musket put into his hands to face the enemy with. Some of the members of the present Board of Ordnance might make excellent lawyers, but he thought they were very unfit to be entrusted with the management of the navy.

§ Sir R. Peel
felt great pleasure at having a son of his honoured by being noticed by so distinguished a member of his own profession as the gallant Officer. He should be exceedingly sorry to lay down any rule against the employment of naval officers, or to do anything that should have the appearance of under-rating the talent or the importance of the services of the members of that profession. But he confessed it did not appear to him that the reasoning of the gallant Officer supported the opinion he had expressed, because there actually was a naval officer on the Board of Ordnance at the very time when he addressed the letter representing the manner in which our ships were equipped.

§ Sir Charles Napier
meant say, that it was extremely difficult to obtain a proper supply of ordnance, and he believed that the muskets applied for were only now, at the present moment ready.

§ Sir R. Peel
should have thought, that a military man was as competent to take care that the muskets were good as a naval officer.

§ Sir Charles Napier
It never has been so.

§ Sir R. Peel
assured the gallant Officer that he should be most unwilling to imply the slightest doubt of the capacity of any member of the profession of which he was so great an ornament; but the observation of the gallant Officer certainly did imply (without intention of course) a doubt of the capacity of the members of the military profession, when he stated that it was impossible for the navy to have good muskets, unless a naval officer were on the Board of Ordnance. He could easily believe that the assistance of a naval man would be beneficial at the Board, but he really did hope that there were men of sufficient acumen, and sufficient experience to take care that such muskets were supplied as did not go off at half-cock.

§ Sir Charles Napier
The right hon. 807 Baronet confined himself to muskets; but there were many other things to be looked to, which none but naval men could understand. He should like to know what a military man knew about ship-gun-carriages, or how a gun should be filled or elevated. It was well known that the guns with which the navy had been fitted through the ordnance department were of the very worst sort of any navy in the world, not even excepting Mehemet Ali's ships.

§ Mr. Wakley
presumed, from the silence of hon. Members who were acquainted with the ordnance department, that the allegations of the gallant Officer were such as could not be contradicted. That gallant Officer had declared that the naval service of this country, which they ought to uphold above all others, had sustained an injury in consequence of there not being any naval officer on the Board of Ordnance. Was it right that a statement of that kind should be made on such high authority, without a hope being held out; that means of redress would be immediately applied. He trusted, that if the Board of Ordnance were inefficient, some change would be made in the constitution of it. The public interests of the country demanded, and the reputation of the navy required it; for that reputation could not be maintained if such statements were to go forth to Europe. He wished to ask whether any inquiry had been instituted with respect to the inventions of Mr. Warner? He alluded to the destructive machine—experiments on which he understood the right hon. Gentleman (Sir H. Hardinge) had himself witnessed.

§ Sir H. Hardinge
wished to observe, that having been for some time connected with the Board of Ordnance, the uniform practice was, that whenever any requisition was made by the Board of Admiralty for gun-carriages, or any new invention of the gun which it was thought advisable for the navy to adopt, it had been the invariable rule of the Ordnance Board to carry the wishes of the Admiralty into effect. He recollected, several years ago, in the case of the ship Caledonia, the inventions of Sir Thomas Hardy, General Miller, and Sir William Congreve, were all fairly brought forward and tried by a united Board. The Board of Ordnance merely gave its opinion as to what it thought to be most efficient, but it remained for the Board of Admiralty positively to determine what 808 was the best gun to be adopted, and Sir George Cockburn and his brother officers of the board did actually decide that question. The Board of Ordnance, in fact, merely carried into execution the wishes of the Board of Admiralty. As to there being at present no naval officer a member of the Board of Ordnance, he could only state that nine-tenths of the business transacted by the Board was military and not naval business. There might be an advantage, he admitted, in having a naval officer on the board; but as to the necessity for it, he thought the fact he had just stated would not sustain any such proposition. Formerly, the Board consisted of a lieutenant-general, and four other officers; now it consisted only of three officers— two military officers and one civil officer, he being the store keeper. This was sufficient to create the difficulty of appointing a naval officer on the Board.

Captain Berkeley
said, that he had belonged to two Boards of Admiralty, and in each of them there was a strong feeling that the Naval Ordnance ought to be under the direction of the Board of Admiralty. He was sure before he left the Admiralty that there was a strong feeling in favour of the adoption of new arms, and why they had not been adopted he knew not.

Major Beresford
wished to inquire whether the vessel now building at Harwich had been contracted for, and if she was being built by contract, whether the lowest tender had been accepted?

§ Captain Boldero
said, that the third contract had been accepted, because the two contracts below that had been clogged with stipulations to which it was not thought right to agree.

Major Beresford
wished to know whether there would be any objection to produce the correspondence that had taken place on the subject.

§ Captain Boldero
was understood to object to this.

§ Sir Charles Napier
felt himself bound again to call attention to the subject of arms for the navy. He had been thirty-one years in the service, and he had never yet seen in the navy a good musket or a good cartouch-box, or even a good lock to a musket. He appealed to any naval officer who heard him to say whether or not he exaggerated. There were 600 captains in the navy, and 200 admirals; they were almost all Conservatives; surely the right hon. Baronet might have found 809 one amongst the number whom he could have placed on the Board of Ordnance. He called on the right hon. Member for Dorchester to say, if the service had not derived great advantage from the circumstance of Captain Duncan belonging to the Board of Ordnance.

§ Sir James Graham
should be sorry to utter one word in depreciation of the services of Captain Duncan. He had derived great satisfaction from having had that gallant officer as his colleague, and he was perfectly ready to say, that the service had derived the utmost benefit from the assistance which he gave in his official capacity, but he did not think, that it was indispensably necessary at all times to have a naval officer on the Board of Ordnance. There were civil details requiring the attention, knowledge, and habits of a civilian, and such a man, he thought, ought to fill the office of clerk of that Board. When he first came into office, Mr. Ward filled that situation. He was not prepared to say anything against the appointment of naval officers, but at the same time, he was not prepared to give any distinct pledge upon the subject.

§ Captain Pechell
observed, that the testimony of the right hon. Member for Dorchester was of great importance upon an occasion such as the present. It was, he believed, the fact, that Captain Duncan had been placed on the Board of Ordnance with the full consent of the right hon. Baronet who spoke last, and he thought, that the objection urged by the gallant Member for Marylebone ought to meet with serious attention. The inefficiency of the arms supplied to the navy was universally admitted; the cutlasses were no better than so many iron hoops—they were only fit for barter on the coast of Africa. No one could deny, that the activity of Captain Duncan, while on the Board, had been productive of the best effects. He did not say, but that in the course of twenty years, improvements might be effected, without having naval officers connected with the Board of Ordnance; but of what value would such improvements be to the present generation? And he, therefore, hoped, that the right hon. Baronet, seeing the dissatisfaction which prevailed, would take measures for putting an end to the causes of discontent and apprehension. As one of the right hon. Baronet's relatives had obtained fa- 810 vourable notice in the navy, he hoped the appointment of another relative to the Ordnance, would be attended with benefit to the service, and prove deserving of similar approbation.

§ Sir C. Napier
said, whether the House took any interest in the subject then before them was what he did not know. He should not say, that he did not care, for he cared a great deal; but this he would take upon himself to say, that if they did not pay more attention to the subject, disasters must occur, which would astonish them. He was grateful to the present Government for the addition made to the seamen, for our ships had not been manned as they ought to be; and on a recent occasion, if a large French fleet, well manned, had borne down upon them, no man could have told what the consequences might have been. Whatever party might be in power, whether Whigs or Tories, or his hon. Friends, the Radicals, he hoped, that means would be taken to prevent our being disgraced, as we had been in the American war.

Captain Fitzroy
said, that the gallant Commodore had omitted to notice the great improvements which had taken place in the arrangement of the great guns, and of the powder on board ship, and of fitting the guns with Congreve sights by the Board of Ordnance. The muskets were the same for the navy as for the army. [Commodore Napier: No, no.] He could only say, that they were marked "Tower." Within the last year or two, improvements had been made in the muskets, which would be introduced into the navy as soon as they were found to be worthy of introduction.

§ Lord A. Lennox
said, a difference of opinion seemed to exist with reference to the muskets issued to the army and navy. As a military man, he could only say, if the same arms were issued to the navy as to the army, nothing could be worse than they were. He had been some twenty years in the service, and he would venture to say, that more wretched arms could not be put into the hands of a soldier, than were given to our army. He hoped, that this discussion would have the effect of placing better arms in the soldiers' hands; without doing so, it was cruel to place soldiers in situations of danger and responsibility.

§ Sir C. Napier
said, that as to the improvements spoken of by Captain Fitzroy, 811 the Americans were three years before us in those improvements.

§ Colonel Peel
thought, that some of the Members of the late Board of Ordnance ought to have defended its previous conduct. He should give his whole time and attention to the improvements in the muskets and to the military part of the department.

Captain Berkeley
said, the very admission just made by the gallant Colonel, that "He would devote himself to the military part of the ordnance department," showed that they ought to have persons to attend to the navy department. He recollected the navy having had to distribute a quantity of muskets to the Spaniards, and that they (the navy) much wished to take those muskets, and give the Spaniards their own instead of them.

§ Colonel Fox
said, the new percussion gun had given great satisfaction.

§ Viscount Palmerston
said, there was no subject which had more engrossed the attention of the late Master-general of the Ordnance than the quality of the muskets given to the British army. He had been long sensible that that arm was not such a one as ought to be put into the hands of British troops, and had devoted a great deal of time and attention to different experiments on the various improvements which had taken place, with the view of arriving at an opinion as to what was the best arm to be given to the army. It would be in the recollection of the House, that his noble Friend had proposed a vote for the purpose of supplying a large portion of the army with a musket of a new construction. It had been a subject of great anxiety to him, that circumstances had prevented him from supplying the army more generally with that musket; he had been anxious to do so as fast as Parliament would supply him with the means.

§ Lord A. Lennox
had not alluded before to the new muskets, for, unfortunately, the army was not supplied with them. He had endeavoured to obtain them for his own regiment on the borders of Canada, but without effect; and that regiment was now supplied with arms that were not of any use.

§ Mr. Wakley
wished to know if anything further had been done with regard to 812 Captain Warner, toward purchasing his explosive invention?

§ Sir R. Peel
said, that the regular course should be followed in these matters; he was persuaded that it was the proper course. His recommendation had been, that Captain Warner should address himself to the Board of Admiralty, and those departments of the service that were responsible. The subject had not been brought under consideration since he had come into office.

§ Mr. Wakley
said, that Captain Warner had been very loud in his complaints against the Board of Ordnance—that they had endeavoured to interfere with his patent. He hoped that the new Board of Ordnance would take the subject into consideration, as the right hon. Baronet had himself seen the tremendous effects of the explosive power.

§ Colonel Fox
believed that Captain Warner had been offered a committee to inquire as to his invention, but had declined it.

§ Mr. C. Wood
said, that Captain Warner had refused to submit his invention to examination to individuals appointed by the Admiralty, and the Admiralty had refused to tyrant him compensation without some grounds to proceed on.

§ Mr. Wakley
said, that Captain Warner's invention was a secret which the various powers of Europe were anxious to purchase, and vast sums of money had been offered to him for it. It could not be expected that he should submit his invention to a committee, in the appointment of which he had no voice. The public would expect that an investigation should be made into the powers which his invention possessed.

Captain Berkeley
said, he had taken some interest in the subject; but it appeared impossible to entertain Captain Warner's proposition; for, from his refusing to state the nature of his invention, it was deemed impossible to admit such an article on board a man-of-war, as it was not certain but that it might blow up and destroy the ship.