§ MR. RYLANDSasked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether his attention has been called to a letter in The Times, in which Sir Thomas Symonds "publicly defies" him to prove a statement made by him in this House, in contradiction of some figures published by Sir T. Symonds in reference to the relative strength of the British and French Navies; and, whether he could, for the satisfaction of the House, make any further statement to make clear the true relation of the facts on which the comparison between the two Navies has been founded?
§ MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANSir, my attention has been called to the letter to which my hon. Friend refers. The remarks which I made in Committee of Supply last week did not relate to a comparison of the relative strength of the British and French Navies. I alluded to a statement made by Sir Thomas Symonds regarding the amount to be spent in the two countries in one 438 year upon the building of armoured ships, which was in these words:—"The French thus vote £906,905 more per annum than we do in building 15 new armoured ships to our 12." This is the definite assertion the inaccuracy of which I thought it right to indicate to the House; and I stated that the amount of the error was about £1,300,000. As I have been defied to prove my statement, I must with regret trespass upon the patience of the House while I explain it as briefly as I can. The most important errors in Sir Thomas Symonds's calculations are two. In the first place, he included for the French ships the cost of materials as well as of labour; in the case of the English ships the cost of labour only. This may be estimated to cause a difference of nearly £500,000. In the second place, he correctly quoted from a summary in the French Estimates £1,025,360 as the total amount to be spent in France upon the construction of armoured ships, and then added to it the amount of the contract Vote—£794,000—apparently unaware that a great part of that Vote had no connection whatever with ironclads, and that, so far as it did relate to ironclads, the amount was already included, and had been placed to the account of the several ships in the summary from which he had quoted.
MR. GORSTI rise to Order, Sir. The Navy Estimates are not yet concluded, and the hon. Gentleman will have an opportunity of entering into this matter upon them. I ask your opinion, Sir, as to whether the hon. Gentleman is not now entering into a matter of debate?
§ MR. RYLANDSIn asking the Question, Sir, I understood that my hon. Friend would state facts, and not enter into matter of debate.
§ MR. SPEAKERI have not yet seen any cause to interrupt the hon. Gentleman. This is a reply to a Question.
§ MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANIt may, perhaps, relieve my hon. and learned Friend's mind to know that I have just done. This amount of £794,000, together with the £500,000 for materials already mentioned, makes up the sum of £1,300,000.