Vtliatto nub naritings in Varliumtut. Horn OF CO111101{3. Thursday, May

23.—Dockyard Management; Sir F. Smith's Motion—Supply, Naval Estimates.

DOCKYARD MANAGEMENT.

The House of Commons met on Thursday after the Whitsuntide recess, and sat late, the main business being supply.

On the motion that the House should go into Committee, Sir FRE- DERICK SMITH called attention to the report of the Commissioners on dockyards, and moved "that it is expedient that such reforms should be made in the control and management of Her Majesty's naval yards as will tend to promote greater efficiency, and consequently insure nsure greater economy, in those establishments." His complaints were that there was no harmony in the departments ; that the Con- troller had no effective power, and that the accounts were mystified and irregular. These assertions he illustrated by statements drawn from the Blue Book, and made some suggestions intended to be reme- dial. He complained of the mode of making contracts, and generally of the inefficient working of the Board of Admiralty, and the absence of effective control. Mr. Luresez seconded the motion; and after Admiral SEYMOUR had made some comments on the desirability of better accounts, Lord ,-,ISEENCE PAGET stated that, as regards accounts, the Accountant- General had prepared a form of accounts by double entry, and devised a scheme by which all the bookkeeping and accounts of the shipbuild- ing departments shall be entirely committed to the charge of one . officer and an assistant at Somerset-house. These accounts will thus be brought into one focus at the Admiralty, and the cost of every ship readily and accurately ascertained. One cause of inefficiency is that the whole of the Admiralty is not united under one roof. " There has been great inconvenience experienced, but it has arisen from this fact, that our departments are separated, and that, whereas they ought to be all under one roof and in daily communication with each other, we have the Con- troller of the Navy. at Whitehall, while the storekeeper, an officer intimately connected with him in all business, is at Somerset-house. Constant communication between those officers has ceased from the day on which the Controller was removed to Whitehall. It is one of the recommendations of the commission, in which I heartily concur, tnat the departments should be re-united. The Admiralty is a great war department, and although we may struggle on in time of peace, yet if war broke out to-morrow it would be found absolutely necessary that all its parts should be brought under one roof. This matter is considered by the Board of Admiralty to be so important that we are already in communication with the Treasury upon the subject, and I hope that before long a great and beneficial change will be made. The hon. and gallant admiral, the member for Devonport, thinks that the recommendation of the commission, that there should each year be laid upon the table an estimate of the cost of ships to be built, could not be carried out. I differ from him. I believe that it can be done; but it can only be done when you have a correct account of what ships cost; therefore, if I were now to lay upon the table an estimate of the cost of what we propose to do this year, it would be only deceiving the House. My noble friend, the Duke of Somerset, has, in order that we may comply with the general wish of the House that we should give all the information which we can, empowered me to give a sort of rough estimate of what we are really going to do, and that estimate I shall be glad to communicate to the Committee when we get to Vote 10. I cannot oppose the motion of my hon. friend. At the same time, I do not think it is necessary, because it is the desire of the Admiralty to carry out the recom- mendations of the commission, and as I understand that if it is carried we shall not be able to go into Committee of Supply to-night, I hope that he will not press it to a division."

Admiral Wancorr expressed his gratification at the announcement that the Admiralty intended to carry out many of the recommenda- tions of the Royal Commissioners, and said that after reading their report he was persuaded that Sir Baldwin Walker, if in England, could not furnish the committee now sitting with any additional in- formation.

Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY was quite willing to give the Dake of Somerset credit for a sincere desire to improve the service. At the same time, when it was remembered that forty-four millions sterling had been voted in eleven years for ship-building, it was not unreason- able that the public should complain of a system of accounts which was admittedly thoroughly unsound. Mr. DALGLISH confessed himself at a loss to know in what respect the Duke of Somerset had exerted himself to reform the service more than Sir James Graham or Sir John Pakington. On the contrary, he considered that the latter right hon. baronet deserved well of the country for the vigorous efforts he had made to introduce reforms. As for the present Secretary of the Admiralty, he had really no more power at the board than a clerk. Mr. LINDSAY was far from satisfied with the explanation of Lord C. Paget, and contended that if there were a well-organized system of management and accounts at the Admiralty the public ought to re- ceive as much for an expenditure of ten millions as they now got for twelve millions—in short that there would be a saving of at least two millions per annum. On the question of ship-building he remarked that he had very great doubt if the form in which we were constructing the new iron-cased frigates was the best that could be adopted, and re- commended that before any more of these gigantic ships were built the Admiralty should invite the tender of models, and throw the competi- tion open to the world. Sir Joan PARINGT0N denied that the Secretary to the Admiralty had not met the question in a fair spirit. He admitted that the Board of Admiralty did not possess proper control, and that their responsibilit was not such-as ought to rest upon them. It was true that the Royal reconstruction had recommended the construction of the Admiral, and the adoption of a new and improved system of accounts ; bat with regard to the former point it was scarcely competent for the Go- vernment to take any steps until the select committee of the House had reported; and as to the latter he was satisfied with the assurance which the Secretary to the Admiralty had given them, that the best mode of carrying out the recommendation was then under con- sideration.

Motion withdrawn.

NAVAL ESTIMATES.

In Commitee of Supply on the Naval Estimates there were three divisions. On the vote of 3,489,4771. for naval stores for the build- ing, repair, and outfit of the fleet, steam machinery, and ships built by contract, Mr. LINDSAY moved that the first item-949,3711. for timber—should be reduced by 300,0001. The sum voted last year, he said, was 722,7584, and for a long series of years prior to 1859 the average amount did not exceed 350,0001. That was a time, moreover, when we built nothing but wooden ships. In 1859, when it was found necessary to reconstruct the navy, the sum asked for was 450,0001., and the amount actually expended was about 600,000/. Our wooden fleet was now considerably larger than all the navies of the world com- bined, and it had been resolved that no more wooden line-of-battle ships should be built. Why, then, should Parliament be asked to vote the enormous sum of 1,000,0001. for timber? Mr. BAXTER seconded the motion. He dilated on the strength and efficiency of our navy. He said we have too many ships. We have a Channel squadron, and the French have none. He had failed to discover that formidable phantom squadron which had raised so much alarm. In the name of common sense, why then demand so much for the purchase of timber. Lord CLutztrcs PAGET said the stock of timber had been reduced too low by the unprecedented expenditure of timber during the last two years, and it was held desirable to increase it. Two months ago the stock on hand was fifty-one thousand loads, much below the usual quantity. It is proposed to purchase seventy-three thousand loads, and as forty-two thousand loads will be consumed this year, the stock on hand will be eighty-two thousand loads, a two years consumption.

ported the vote. A far higher question than one of expenditure was i at stake, both with respect to iron-cased ships and the stock of timber —namely, whether or notgland was to remain the first maritime Power of the world. If the Honse of Commons meant England to occupy this position they must not indulge every now and then in these hot and cold fits about expenditure, because cost was an indis- pensable condition of our supremacy. What struck him more strongly almost than anything else when he was in office, in 1858 and 1869, was the deficient supply of timber in the dockyards, though the stock then was larger than it had been for some years.

Lord PALMERSTON described the motion as intending to cripple the Navy.

" My noble friend stated that if the supply of timber is obtained which we now ask for, we shall only have two years' consumption in our stores; and I remem- ber when this question was discussed last year it was maintained that we ought at least to have three years consumption on hand. Then it is said that iron ships. only are to be built; but hon. gentlemen appear to run away with the idea that iron ships are built entirely of iron. My two hon. friends must, I am sure, be perfectly aware that an iron ship contains a vast quantity of wood, and it is absurd to say that, because iron ships are to be built, you will not require a stock of timber. Then it is said, You ought to take example from France, who has abandoned all idea of rivalling us in our navy • and that it is absurd for us to have the stock of timber which this vote would enable us to to obtain, seeing the total abstinence of France from anything like an attempt to rival our navy. But do hon. gentlemen know what is the amount of timber now in stock in the French arsenal.? This vote would give us a supply of 80,000 loads, but the French, with a smaller navy, and smaller demands for timber, have 160,000 loads in stock, just double that which we should have if this vote were granted. The reasons given by my noble friend, and supported by the right hon. baronet, for making contracts when opportunity offers, are unanswerable. You cannot go into the market and order a supply of timber like a supply of coals. It is well known that timber fit for certain purposes grows only in certain positions, end if when an opportunity offers for making contracts you do not take advantage of it, other people step in, and you are left without the material necessary for the maintenance of your navy. Under these circumstances I hope the House will see that no reason has been shown for diminishing this vote, or for blaming the Admiralty for making contracts for the material necessary to the maintenance of that navy without which the country would be utterly ruined."

Mr. BRIGHT said that members of that House, fresh from French dockyards, had not seen the stocks of timber spoken of. Lord Palmer- ston had talked before of a phantom French fleet, and now he brought forward phantom stocks of timber.

It was now pretty well proved that we had more ships of every class than all the rest of the world put together, and therefore it could not be necessary, in the opinion of any man outside of a lunatic asylum, that we should go on increasing our navy at the same rate as in the last two years. If that were so, why was so large a vote of timber asked for when the vote for last year was greatly in excess of former years? It was clear, therefore, that at the end of the year the stock would be enormously above the ordinary amount which was required in the navy. (Hear.) They had not the least reason to suppose from what the noble viscount had said, for he was in a very " Rule Britannia" sort of mood that night—. (laughler)—that next year the vote would be any less. The noble viscount had not treated the subject as he ought in his responsible position. He would find before long that 70,000,0001. of taxes was more than the people would bear. With no nal iendly feeling he told the noble viscount that he had created the difficult ice with which his Chancellor of time Exchequer, both this year and last year, had had to contend in the House.

Mr. lisamtv answered Mr. Bright„ remarking that his speech was really a speech on the general expenditure of the country. Mr. Hen- ley contended that our store of timber was insufficient.

It was said that it was a great feature in Sir B. Walker's character that he found out there was no timber in the dockyards. Sir B. Walker might have known that by asking any person who chose to look into the stock of timber and the amount of work ordered by this House. With the report of the Dockyard Committee, showing how many loads of timber each ship would take, it became as clear as the sun at noonday that they must build with unseasoned timber. It was so app,trent to him, that he thought it right to call the attention of the House to It. A good deal of unseasoned timber had been put into these ships, and they would require a great deal of repair in consequence. What occurred with the gunboats? They had had to pull them to piecesand do them up again, and did they suppose that these ships of the line would not come into the same category ? To put hot boilers next to unseasoned wood was a safe receipt to produce rot. Whatever expense might be thus occasior.ed ought to be saved. Whether the French had fifty thousand or a hundred thousand loads was nothing to us. It was the duty of our Government to keep our arsenals full of timber, so that if occasion should come there would be the timber ready for use. (Cheers.) English oak was not fit for use until it had been three years in the dockyards, and those yards were now cleaned out. There was a very low stock of timber in the dockyards, and it was the first duty of the Government to get that stock up again. (Cheers.) He did not want to go into general matters further than to remark, upon the observation of the hon. member for Birmingham as to the &ragout of property at sea, that property at sea could be insured, but the honour of the country could not be insured except by proper ships and armaments. They might go to Lloyd's and insure property at sea, and it might be even better to get money instead of goods, but the honour of the country could not be in- sured except by stout ships and good men in them. (Cheers.)

The debate was continued for some time, and then on a division the amendment was negatived by 66 to 30. Mr. Danner then moved that the item of 271,7571. for metals, be reduced by 71,7571. Negatived by 76 to 32.

Mr. LINDSAY next moved that the sum of 100,000i. for iron for an iron-cased ship to be built at Chatham be omitted, upon the ground that the commissioners had reported that it was not advisable to carry on the building of such ships In the Government dockyards under the existing system of accounts, without the means attainable of testing the coat of the work.

Sir F. Slant considered that it was most desirable that one iron ship at. least should be built in a Government dockyard, in order that they might have an opportunity of testing the character and cost of the work, and seeing if it could not be done as well and as cheaply as in a private dockyard. Lord C. PAGET defended the vote, and said that the new dock at Chatham afforded the best accommodation for building an iron ship there. Mr. DAEGLISH observed that even for the building of a wooden ship the smithy at Chatham, was a mere ruin; and until the House should have agreed to the vote for a steam factory there would be no ade- quate machinery there for constructing iron ships.

A debate arose in a very thin house. Sir Jolla Psinic.roa sup- On a division the amendment to reduce the vote was negatived by 66 to 3L

Here the Chairman reported progress and the House resumed. AUSTRIA. AND HUNGARY.

Mr. D. Garyrim asked whether information had been received that the Austrian Government are removing the troops of the late Duke of Modena from the territory of Venetia ; and, also, whether that Go- vernment were transferring troops from Mantua and other fortresses in Venetia to Hungary, for the purpose of the collection of taxes in the latter country.

Lord JOHN Rosana, said no information had been received at the Foreign-office with respect to the removal of the troops of the late Duke of Modena from the territory of Venetia, or the contemplated employment of those troops in the collection of taxes. He did not think he was at all called upon at the present moment to enter into the question which had arisen between Austria and Hungary, but he might take the opportunity of stating that he had given no opinion in favour of the former as against the latter, and had, when speaking on the subject on a preilions occasion, simply expressed a wish that Hun- gary might be able to enjoy her liberty according to her ancient Con- stitution, and that that liberty might be found to be compatible with. the maintenance of the present dynasty.