While we were discussing our Navy, the French were dis-
cussing theirs. On Monday, M. Lockroy made an impressive speech, the gist of which was,—" They order things better in England." The French Estimates were two-thirds of the English, and therefore their Fleet ought to be two-thirds as powerful. Instead, it was not half as powerful,—a statement, by the way, which our experts will not admit for a moment.
Even in men they were far below us, having only 39,600 effectives. England had double as many. In France ship- building was much dearer and slower, and the ships had nothing like the same speed. Curiously enough, M. Lockroy attributed French inefficiency to the division of responsi- bility. "In England this fell on the Commander-in-Chief, who had only a small staff under his orders,"—a blunder which we hope may prove prophetic. On Tuesday, the Reporter on the Navy Estimates and Admiral Besnard, the new Minister of Marine, defended the French Fleet. The French ships were good, the guns the beet in the world, and the speed of English ships was exaggerated. A French vessel despatched from Siam had outstripped two English fast cruisers. No doubt the French Fleet has defects, but it would be a great mistake to pay too much attention to speeches like that of M. Lockroy, or to make them an excuse for relax- ing our efforts to be invincible at sea under all circumstances. That is the only path of safety, and also the greatest possible guarantee of peace.
