ing table gives at one view the progressive diminution of sickness and death in the naval service, calculated on 100,000 men.

By this table, it would appear that the diminution of sick and of deaths was in the proportion of four to one nearly between the years 1779 and 1813. The diminution of desertions from the hospitals in the same period is not the less remarkable, and affords the strongest proof of the progressive amelioration of the condition of seamen on board our ships of war. 'Man,' says M. Dupin, ' employs all the means within his reach to fly from a kind of life which presents only the hideous picture of privations while afloat, or sickness, suffering, and death in a hospital. But when every cause of discontent, of disgust, and of alarm is diminished and made almost to disappear, the sailor holds very cheap the fatigues and the dangers of the sea and of battle; he no longer thinks of deserting.'

M. Dupin has taken a statement which we formerly made of the actual loss in men sustained by the British fleet in each year, commencing with 1810, when every captain was ordered to transmit a list, made up to the 1st January, of all the deaths that had taken place under his command in the preceding year. The result was as under.

About one half of the above numbers died of disease, the other half in fight, by accidents in landing, boats upsetting, shipwrecks, &c. It follows then, that, in the three years above-mentioned, the proportion of deaths in 100,000 men employed afloat was 3,302; and if to these we add the number of seamen who, in the following year, died in the hospitals, namely 698, the total loss of life in that year, out of somewhat more than 100,000 men, may be estimated at 4,000 men. Thus,' says M. Dupin, in the latter years of the war against the French empire, the English navy lost only about a twenty-fifth part of its whole force:' and he adds, on what authority we know not, that the loss in the British army, about the same period, on an average of six years, was

12,356 in every 100,000 men, that is to say, about one eighth part of the whole; and the unavoidable conclusion is, that there is at least three times more risk of life to serve in the army than in the navy of Great Britain. Taking the number of seamen that died of disease alone, afloat and in the hospitals, we have 2,349 in 100,000 men, that is to say, a forty-second part of the whole. Forty years ago, the annual mortality in the uavy was one fourteenth of the effective force; so that the number of deaths, at present, in the navy, has diminished in the proportion of three to

one.

On this part of the subject M. Dupin states two very remarkable facts respecting the French navy-first, that

* In the year 1819, out of an effective force of 32,000 individuals belonging to the French navy, 24,000 were sent to the hospital-they remained there, on an average, twenty-five days, or 60,000 [it should be 600,000] days for one man. Following up this proportion, we have, on every hundred thousand individuals, employed (in time of peace) in the French marine, 75,000, who are annually sent to the hospital. Now, from 1811 to 1813 (a time of war), out of 100,000 English seamen, 6,923 men only were sent annually to the hospital.'

Secondly, that of the total charge of the British navy in 1820, amounting to 170,000,000 francs, the expense of the medical department was 1,837,700 francs, or a ninety-third part; whereas, of the total expense of the French navy, amounting to 45,000,000 francs, that of the medical department was 1,500,000 francs, or one-thirtieth part of the whole: and it follows from these two facts, that, with ten times more sickness in the French navy than in the English, the expenditure in the former is to that in the latter as three to one. By calculations, grounded on official documents, M. Dupin shows that, in the naval service of the two countries, the management of the French is more costly than of the English by one per cent.-(tom. i. p. 269.)

Our author seems to think that the British government has been too prodigal in recompensing by promotion and otherwise the officers who have raised to such a pitch of glory the naval service of their country; but of this we cannot allow him to be a judge: he admits however that the praise due to it for its attention to the common seamen and marines, their widows and children, ought not to be clouded by any censorious observation; for it is' (says he) the glory of the British administration.' The magnificent institution of Greenwich Hospital, the wonder and despair of the world, has not failed of its effect on M. Dupin. It is indeed a proud display of national gratitude. Besides the wounded and worn-out officers which form the establishment, it lodges, feeds, and clothes 3,000 aged, infirm, and helpless seamen within its walls;

VOL. XXVI. NO. LI.

C

walls; it has two schools for the maintenance and education of one thousand children, the sons and daughters of distressed officers, seamen and marines; and out of its revenues it has been able, until the last year, to grant annual pensions to 30,000 seamen and upwards, to the amount of more than £300,000, which parliament has since made good. On this subject, our author says

'Si l'on prend le nombre total des officiers à la demi-solde et des pensionnaires de Greenwich, soit internes, soit externes, on verra que, pendant la paix, le gouvernement Britannique vient au secours d'environ quarante mille des gens de mer qui l'ont servi pendant la guerre précédente. Ainsi près d'un tiers des marins qui servaient alors, est secouru par la patrie; un sixième environ reste au service actif. C'est donc la moitié des serviteurs de l'état, que la force navale soutient, à l'heure de la reconnaissance. Honneur au peuple Britannique, pour sa noble et généreuse gratitude!'-tom. i. p. 278.

We need not follow M. Dupin in the details of the naval departments, as to their management, expenses, &c., which, however interesting they may be to his countrymen, are known, or may be known, to any one who chooses to consult the printed estimates and other reports annually laid before parliament. We must content ourselves by noticing a few of his observations on the matériel of the navy. After enumerating many of the improvements which have recently been introduced in the construction and equipment of English ships of war, and which he avows he ardently wishes to see introduced into the French navy, he laments that all his arguments, all his observations, and all the facts which he had collected, have hitherto been unavailing in carrying conviction into the minds of his countrymen, who, it seems, manifest the utmost reluctance to copy from us.

The English ships of war,' (says he,) with all the improvements which we have just made known, are superior to French ships of war, 1st. As fabrics that are solid, durable, and, as preserving their form, nearly unchangeable; 2d. As military machines, without any weak points, being capable, within the same space, to discharge a mass of fire much more considerable; and nevertheless to exercise more at ease this accumulated artillery; 3d. As habitable fabrics. They have banished from these ships of war the fantastical mixture of mean and highly finished ornaments, of a species of decoration more suited for dwelling houses, and fit only to degrade the austere beauties of naval architecture. They have banished all those refinements of bad taste; refinements which always produced a most miserable effect, which, nevertheless, giving to the exterior an air of luxury and magnificence, encourage naval officers to expend in the interior a still greater degree of luxury; in short, which pervert from its purpose a floating fortress, by changing it into a furnished hotel, supported at a great expense to the nation.'tom. i. p. 165.

M.

M. Dupin pays a just tribute to the new system of carpentry introduced by Sir Robert Seppings, which, he says, has the immense advantage of making the English ships more firm and solid, and consequently of greater duration than those of France, though constructed with timber of smaller dimensions. And he complains that even the Dutch have got the start of his countrymen, in adopting this system. We understand, however, that at Cherburgh a frigate of 60 guns has been recently built on Sir Robert Seppings's principle of a round stern, which gives an equal degree of strength with that of the bow,-to a part of the ship that was, before its adoption, the weakest.

The internal arrangement of our ships of war is highly approved by our author. The great convenience and comfort of throwing light below by means of illuminators; the fitting up of the cabins, and store-rooms; the great improvement of arranging the powder-magazine, and of the means adopted for keeping the powder free from damp; the irou tanks for preserving water pure for any length of time:-these and other advantages, to which the long revolutionary war has given rise, are all mentioned by M. Dupin in terms of the highest praise, not unmingled with regret that his own government has not thought fit to adopt them.

The organization of the ports and arsenals of Great Britain is infinitely superior, M. Dupin says, to the existing organization of those of France.-He contrasts the punctuality and fidelity with which all engagements made for the naval service of England are preserved, with the frauds and bad faith which characterized the system of management followed by the minister of the Imperial Marine. He tells us that Napoleon, while he still grasped with a firm hand the reins of empire, tried to arrest the disastrous course of the French marine, by placing by the side of the chief of this department, advisers recommendable by their wisdom and experience; but that Decrès very soon discovered the art of reducing to a nullity, a council which he first contrived to disgust, and then procured to be finally dissolved as useless; thus,' says M. Dupin, was saved the omnipotence of the minister, and the precious privilege of never being obliged to hear the importunate voice of wisdom and experience!'

We have neither room nor inclination to follow our author in his account of the naval arsenals, the duties of the several officers, their responsibility, pay, &c. all of which he found detailed in the estimates laid annually before parliament.-His description of the docks, basins, machinery, &c. must have been procured from other quarters, and, we believe, are, generally speaking, correct. The new smithery at Woolwich, with its simple and beautiful machinery

c 2

machinery for mitigating the laborious exertions of the smiths employed in anchor-making and other heavy work, the execution of that excellent engineer, Mr. Rennie,* meets with the unqualified approbation of M. Dupin. He describes, very minutely, that admirable piece of machinery in Chatham dock-yard for the management of timber, the invention and execution of the ingenious Brunell; and gives a clear account of the block-machinery at Portsmouth, constructed by the same person, which is the admiration of all strangers, thousands of whom annually visit the dockyard for the sole purpose of witnessing its operations. In describing the works at Plymouth, he enters into a detailed account

Scarcely was the ink dry which traced the name of this extraordinary and most excellent man, when we heard with unspeakable regret of his removal from all earthly

concerns.

Thus in the short space of two years has the nation lost three of its most distinguished and useful ornaments, to whose exertions she is mainly indebted for the vast strides which have been made, in the course of the last half-century, in the arts and sciences, and for the rapid and important improvements which have taken place in manufactures, commerce, and navigation. Need we mention the names of Banks, Watt, and Rennie?-If the first was distinguished by the early example which he set in his own person, and by the liberal protection which he afforded to the arts and sciences; and the second by the brilliancy of an inventive genius, a vigorous intellect, and a comprehensive mind; the last was not the less remarkable for soundness of judgment, clearness of conception, and a strength and firmness of mind which enabled him to grapple with and subdue difficulties that would have overwhelmed men of even more thau ordinary capacities. Born in North Bri tain, he had the benefit of an useful education commonly enjoyed by the natives of that country. Brought up to the trade of a millwright, he had the good fortune to be employed in erecting the metal-mills at Bolton's manufactory of Soho, where Mr. Watt, his countryman, and thenceforward his intimate friend, was conducting the manufacture of his improved steam-engine; and when that magnificent structure, the Albion mill, was erecting, the construction of the machinery was entrusted to Mr. Rennie. The admirable manner in which this work was executed could not fail to bring its author into general notice; and, accordingly, in all the great manufactories and establishments, public or private, where Watt's steam-engine supplied the moving power, Rennie was employed to furnish the machinery. It will readily be supposed that the strength and solidity of his work did not always meet with a correspondent strength and solidity in the foundations on which it was to be erected; and this, by no means uncommon defect, naturally turned his comprehensive mind to the studies and practice of a civil engineer; a profession in which he very soon attained the highest eminence. In tracing the lines of our numerous inland navigations, in planning the great drains for the recovery of fenny lands, in the construction of piers, wharfs, docks, bridges, and in laying secure and solid foundations under water, and on soft or sandy bottoms, he probably had no equal, and certainly no superior. To his suggestions and superintendence are owing a number of most important improvements in his Majesty's dock-yards; and there is scarcely a port or harbour in the United Kingdom, that does not attest the benefit of his labours by the conversion of danger and obstruction into security and convenience. Such indeed was the confidence in the skill and integrity of Mr. Rennie, that the disposal of more than thirty millions sterling was entrusted to him, in the course of the late revolutionary war, to be laid out in works of national utility. The Breakwater at Plymouth, jointly planned by his friend Whidbey and himself, and the design and construction of Waterloo Bridge, wholly his own, are alone sufficient to immortalize his

naine.

To the public the loss of such a man is not easily replaced; to his family, it is irreparable.

of