Mr. E. J. Reed, formerly Constructor of the Navy, has
been attacking Mr. Goechen in three letters written at the invitation of the Times, for not proceeding as rapidly as he ought with the construction of powerful ironclads representing the most advanced scientific improvements. He maintains that Prussia, and even Brazil, will soon surpass us in rigged ironclads, ironclads capable of going under sail as well as steam ; and that Russia will surpass us in those great destructive engines which mud depend wholly on steam, as soon as her 'Peter the Great' is completed. Mr. Reed's first letter received an able reply from a writer signing himself 'Trafalgar,' and probably receiving some of his information from the Admiralty, who urged that the last two years have been wisely spent in getting up the nnarmoured part of our Navy into a better condition, in consequence of the too exclusive devotion of previous• years to the big ironclads; that the 'Peter the Great' is the only vessel which can really compare with the most powerful British ironclads ; and that though Mr. Reed may have designed several very powerful vessels for foreign Governments, the duty of the British Admiralty is not so much to urge on competition with all the individual designs of foreign Governments, as to act on a well-considered plan for making our Navy, as a whole, more powerful than any navy or navies with which it might have to try its strength. We do not greatly trust Mr. Reed's judgment in these matters. His quarrel with the Admiralty evidently biases his judgment. But he is a man whose knowledge on the subject. must necessarily exceed that of almost every other critic, some of his statements are cer- tainly alarming, and we think we may trust his judgment when he virtually asks that Mr. Childers's Naval scheme should be more energetically carried out. After his difference with Mr. Childers, he can hardly care to extol Mr. Childers's intentions at Mr. Goschen's expense, unless there be some foundation for his preference.
Previous page
