Ixx1v.] BATTLES WITH LORD PALMERSTON. 841

He deplored the absence from the scene of his steadfast ally, 1862
but Mr, Bright remained at Rochdale. He told Cobden how Zr. 58.

Dumber of line-of-battle ships exceeding by one that in the British navy.
It is notorious that France is now building a number of iron-oaged ships
More or less rapidly, exceeding that which we are building. It is
Botorions that having these ships she has between 80,000 and 40,000
¥eamen, inscribed in a register, whom she can add to her present number
of sailors, which exceeds 33,000. Such being the state of facts, I will menton
 to you that two years ago I stated to the Count de Persigny, then
Ambagsador of France, that our maritime strength was essential to our
Sxistence as a nation; that in 1817 Lord Castlereagh had stated to a Select
Committee that Great Britian ought to have a navy equal to the two
Strongest navies in the world, that the nation had accepted this dictum as a
Practical maxim always to be kept in view.
“Acting on these general views, we donot care whether France has or not
400,000 soldiers in arms, with 200,000 more ready drilled and capable of
joining their colours in a fortnight, but we do care when we see her cherish
ing, nursing, and increasing her naval forces. We therefore endeavour to
Provide a navy adequate to maintain our character, our position, and our
safety, We are willing to stake our existence as a Ministry on the grant of
the number of men for the navy we have asked for. I am aware that the
®xpense is great, the burden is irksome, and that the French are irritated by
our obstinacy in being determiaed to defend ourselves. But all these contiderations
 yield to the paramount consideration of national security.
“Upon this ground whenever you raise the question we shall be ready to
stand.
“ Allow me before I close to ask you to reflect on the suggestions which are
made to you and Mr. Lindsay, and not to Lord Cowley, Col. Claremont, and
Oommander Hore, by the French Ministers, These suggestions appear tome
to betoken a desire on the part of France to raise in Parliament an opposition
 to armaments of a defensive character, in order to ensure French
Supremacy. This policy would not be unnatural, nor would it be new,
Lord Macaulay, in giving an account of the instructions of Lewis to his
Ambagsador, Count Tallard, when he came to England after the peace of
Ryswick, says, ‘In the original draft of the instructions was a curious
Paragraph which, on second thoughts, it was determined to omit. The
Ambassador was directed to take proper opportunities of cautioning the
English against a standing army a8 the only thing which could really be
fatal to their laws and liberties.’
“We are very glad to enter with the French into improved commercial
relations, and very grateful to you for your labours in this direction. But
when they advise us against arming for our defence, while they do not "bate
B jot of their preparations military and naval, the instinct of the British
ation distrusts the friendship which appears in so suspicious a guise.
I remain, yours very faithfully,
J. Russzit'’