§ MAJOR ANSONrose to call the attention of the House to the relative cost of the Woolwich 7-inch Gun and the converted 7-inch Gun, as given on the 13th August, in the last Session of Parliament, by the Secretary for War. He had, however, first to thank his right hon. Friend for the frank manner in which he had met all inquiries on this subject. He (Major Anson) stated last Session that the cost of the Woolwich gun was about £425, while the converted gun was made for under £200. Much to his astonishment the Secretary for War made out in his reply that, so far from the difference in the cost of the two guns being £220, it only amounted to £140. Now, in arriving at these figures, the Secretary for War gave the price of the Woolwich gun manufactured in the Royal Gun Factories at £405, which was the actual sum that the House would be asked to vote in order to make a new gun at Woolwich; while the right hon. Gentleman gave the cost of the converted gun at manufacturers' prices—the contract price. This was not a fair comparison. If it had been determined to give the contract prices for these guns it ought to have been stated that such was the case. But not satisfied with having given the contract prices for these guns, he mentioned only the very highest estimate that had been sent in. He (Major Anson) would read to the House the estimates of Major Palliser for his guns. For the A pattern gun it was £238; for the B pattern £25 less, or £213; and since then he had produced a 7-inch gun for £195, thus reducing the estimate by £18. He (Major Anson) had no wish that in the answer given to him the lowest estimate should be stated; he would have been content with the medium price; and he thought that the estimates sent in by Major Palliser should, in justice to him, have been stated to the House. The right hon. Gentleman gave the estimate as £263, whereas the highest estimate of Major Palliser was £238. In this way £25 was put on, which was about the value of the gun sent to be converted. He need hardly point out that if the exact price of the Woolwich gun was given, the exact price in the other case should have been given also. But that was not all. He found now that the £405 which had been quoted 429 as the price of the Woolwich gun was not the price of that gun at all. It was the price of an imaginary gun. Only two of the Woolwich guns had been made with a wrought-iron barrel, and both had failed. The actual service 7-inch gun was made with a steel barrel, and cost £264, which was the price that ought to have been stated in the House in answer to him. He need hardly point out to the House the object of putting the Palliser gun in a point of view as unfavourable as possible, and, on the contrary, placing the Woolwich gun in the most favourable light. The subject was one well worthy of the attention of the House. If he (Major Anson) seemed to have been somewhat particular in bringing the matter under the notice of the House, his excuse was that he was convinced that the manufacturing establishments of this country, as at present constituted, wielded a power capable of crushing almost every man who attempted to improve and cheapen our warlike stores; and if inventors could not get justice at the hands of these establishments, it was all the more necessary that the truth should be stated in that House. Before he sat down there was one question which he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman. It might be in the recollection of the House that there was a lighter gun, the 32-pounder converted into a 64-pounder, with reference to which the right hon. Gentleman had said that he had been reminded that the Admiralty had ordered a further supply of the smaller converted gun, and in the conversion of that gun it was intended to proceed. Now, he (Major Anson) had heard that the authorities had re-opened the experiments in this case, and had decided that the 64-pounders were to be tested by firing 2,000 rounds each. He objected to that, on the ground of the time that would be wasted. He had not been able to find any one who had the slightest doubt that the guns would stand that test. So much was that the case, that Major Palliser was going to submit one of his guns, which had been condemned by the Royal Gun Factory, to the test in question. It might seem strange to the House that the Royal Gun Factory should sit in judgment on guns produced by rivals, but such was the case. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he might be able to apply a portion of any sum of money he might take for the manufacture of guns this year to the conversion of guns should it be deemed advisable?
§ SIR JOHN PAKINGTONwas understood to say that he objected to the hon. and gallant Gentleman's making, as he had done, a speech in the end of November in reply to a statement which had been made in the month of August. He hoped his hon. and gallant Friend did not impute to him any intention of stating anything contrary to the facts on the occasion to which he had referred. His hon. and gallant Friend had complained that he had given the highest prices, instead of the lowest; but he had taken the price of the gun which had been tested, of which he knew the merits, and which was the only one of which he could speak. His hon. and gallant Friend complained that with regard to the estimates for converted guns he had given manufacturers' prices. That was the case, because at that time the Arsenal had no experience and had no means of arriving at an independent conclusion. The question was one of comparison between two guns of the same description; but Major Palliser's gun was made with an iron tube, whereas the Woolwich gun was made with a steel tube, and the sum of £405 was the most accurate estimate he could form supposing the gun was made like Major Palliser's, with a wrought-iron tube. But the House would probably prefer hearing what were the intentions of the Government as to the future, rather than have its time occupied with a comparatively small matter. His hon. and gallant Friend (Major Anson) asked whether he would be willing to frame the Estimates in a particular manner. He was not prepared to give a promise on that point; all he could say was that the subject should have his best consideration. There was one point upon which he agreed entirely with his hon. and gallant Friend, and that was that through all Her Majesty's possessions they were deficient in the proper and requisite number of rifled guns, and it was very important that they should proceed as quickly as they could to supply the deficiency. The first question which then arose was whether it was desirable to proceed with the conversion of the smooth-bore 68-pounder? On this point he was obliged to adhere to the opinion he had given on a former occasion that it would not be expedient to do so. For the reasons he had stated on that occasion it was the opinion of the Ordnance Department that this gun when converted would not be able to stand the heavy charges that would be required. On the other hand, the 32-pounder might be con- 431 verted into a 64-pounder, which when rifled would be a most useful gun and amply repay the cost of conversion. They had a large store of these guns, and it was the intention of the Government in the course of next year to convert a large number of them into rifled guns of 64-pounders, and this would not be done in the Arsenal, but by the private trade under the immediate superintendence of Major Palliser. He hoped his hon. and gallant Friend would be satisfied that the Government were only anxious to do what was best for the public service.