THE KING'S "NAVEE."

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 9485, 24 July 1902, Page 4

THE KING'S "NAVEE."

LORD C. BERESFORD SAYS IT HAS NO RULER.

A "ROTTEN" SYSTEM.

LONDON, June 21. A characteristically vigorous attack on the Admiralty by Lord Charles Beresford led to some lively passages in tiie House of Commons yesterday. On the vote of £294,300 for the Admiralty Office, Lord Charles said that hitherto they had asked for money; his intention now was to call attention to the want of efficiency of the forces we had already paid for. The system under which we labored was a rotten one; it hud proved to be a rotten one by every Committee and Commission that had reported on it. 'All the improvements in the fleet," declared Lord Charles energetically "have been made by public agitation and the press." He then cited case after case —from the panic of 1877, when £6,000,000 was voted, down to 1901, when, he said, there was a remarkable agitation as to the provisions and strength of the Mediterranean fleet. Now, he remarked, there were thirteen battleships in the Mediterranean against ten this time last year, and all were ready to go into action, which could only be said of eight a year ago. The torpedo-catchers were now double what they were, and the stores 80 per cent, better. Having admitted the improvement, Lord Charles declared emphatically that officers had continually to threaten to resign in order to -Ret things put right. "My experience of 43 years is that com-manders-in-chief at nearly every station spend half their time in writing home to the Admiralty for things that are essential." Where were our reserves? We had 20,000 when we ought to have 80,000, and in the engineroom department the number of men was actually some thousand short at the present moment—a most dangerous position, Lord Charles urged, for we could not improvise skilled artificers in time of war. It was the constitutio nof the Board of Admiralty that allowed these tliines. Lord Charles Beresford, continuing, averred that the keynote of reform wns direct responsibility for efficiency. At present, said Lord Charles, no one was responsible, and the experts had no real control.