§ MR. S. SMITH (Flintshire)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the discrepancy between the statement made by him explanatory of the Navy Estimates, 1889–90 (pages 5 and 6), where the nine first class cruisers and the 29 second class cruisers are all given a "speed at sea (continuous steaming) of 18 knots," whilst in the Navy Estimates, published in February of this year, the same first class cruisers are given a continuous seagoing speed of 96 hours duration, natural draught, in smooth water, and with clean bottoms, of 16¼ knots an hour, and the second class cruisers mentioned above a speed of 16 knots; and whether he can explain these differences?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Lord G. HAMILTON,) Middlesex, EalingThe particulars given for these cruisers at pages 5 and 6 of the statement were supplemented by those given on pages 182 and 188 of the Navy Estimates for 1889–90. From the latter 1345 it will be seen that the figures for speeds relate to maximum trial speeds—with forced draught, 20 knots, and natural draught, 18 knots, respectively. The words continuous steaming, as the context shows, were used to contrast the speed developed under forced draught for four hours, and that under natural draught for a longer period. Since the preparation of the Estimates for 1889–90, and the explanatory statement thereon, the whole question of the probable development of power in Her Majesty's ships when steaming continuously at sea for long periods has been re-considered. A number of trials have been made with ships on service, and the figures published in the Navy Estimates for 1890–91 represent the results of the inquiry, and the calculated speeds corresponding to the powers that will probably be developed for long periods under the conditions of actual service. I may add that the capacity and boiler power of these vessels have been largely increased, and are some 20 per cent, in excess of that contained in the original design.