MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, did the Director of Naval Construction or did the Engineer-in-Chief of the Admiralty examine and report upon the various tenders and designs which were under consideration for the building of the Admiralty yacht "Enchantress"; and, if not, who did examine them; who is responsible for advising the adoption of the design finally adopted; seeing that the metacentric height of the "Enchantress" is still stated to be sixteen inches, can he state why it was necessary to put 200 tons of ballast into the vessel; what was her draught of water after that ballast was put in; and what was the difference, if any, between that draught and the draught stipulated by the Admiralty.
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN, Suffolk, Woodbridge)The answer to the first Question is yes; but the examination was limited to ascertaining whether the general arrangements and accommodation were satisfactory and a comparison of the qualities of speed, radius of action, stability, etc., guaranteed by the several contractors. The Admi alty could take no responsibility for these qualities in a vessel wholly designed and built by a private firm. The conditions were the 985 same as those under which all the torpedo-boat destroyers have been built. The answer to the second Question is, the Controller of the Navy on the usual reports of the technical advisers. The 200 tons of ballast are required to obtain the guaranteed metacentric height in the light condition. The permanant ballast has not yet been put on board. The amount may probably be reduced to 100 tons, this will give the vessel an additional immersion of about five inches.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether he was to understand that the examination was limited to the question of accommodation.
§ MR. PRETYMANNo, Sir, I said it was limited to the general arrangements and accommodation, and a comparison of qualities of speed, radius of action, stability, etc., guaranteed by the several contractors.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether this was the vessel in which the Lords of the Admirality, having made one trip, were afraid to go to sea in because of her evil behaviour.
§ MR. PRETYMANwas understood to stay that what happened was this. The ship had to proceed to Queenstown. The water ballast was put in too far forward and the vessel shipped a good deal of water at the head in heavy seas. When, however, the ballast was put back and the vessel was properly trimmed, she proceeded to sea the next morning and behaved extremely well.