HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

!7G

by France, as mistress of the port of Dunkirk, was in itself sufficient to counter-balance the utmost effort even of a formidable naval force. The ships destined for

this

Then, as to the ad, which relates to a Dutch dogger, it seems not at all material, only to swell acomplaint; but, as to what is insinuated, that the three men of war did not stir for want of orders, it■is well know'll, that when her majesty’s ships get sight of an enemy, they stand in need of no particu-lar orders to attack them ; for their general instructions, annexed to their commissions, do sufficientlyrequire that of them ; but this happening at five o’clock in the evening in the month of November,it was impossible for any of the three slips before mentioned to have come up with the privateer ; andthe Dutch ship was secure under the guns of the fortification.

The lord-high-admiral cannot, without great concern, take notice of the list of 1146 ships said to belost during this war ; although it is possible great part of that number consists of gallies or runners :and that some part of this loss may be attributed to the incertable fate of war. Some have arisen fromthe wilfulness or negligence of masters of merchant ships, who, when sufficient convoys have beengranted them, have deserted that protection, and exposed themselves a prey to the enemy, of which fre-quent complaints have been made.

.Lastly, as to the 6th article, which in the complaint of Mr. Way, that care was not taken of hisship from the West Indies, their lordships are desired to refer to the copies of two letters herewithtransmitted to them, one from Sir John Jennings, and the other from the captain of the Northumber-land ; which give a particular account of that matter j and was not complained of at the Admiralty of-■fice’before it was brought to their lordships.

Thus much being said as to the reports of the lords committees, grounded upon the depositions ofthe merchants, which are partly what they say, of their own knowledge, and the rest what they havegathered from others, the lord-high-admiral thinks it necessary to lay before their lordships some far-ther observations under the following heads, to explain some papers which have been demanded by theirlordships from the Admiralty office.

1 . That, notwithstanding-the almost continual use of her majesty's ships, the loss sustained bystorms, particularly in the violent tempest in 170S, and the many hazards they have been exposed untoin their exteusive war ; the number of ships of the royal navy is so far from being diminished since hermajesty’s accession to the throne, that it Is increased by ten ships of war ; although the parliament hathnot, in this reign, given one farthing for building ships ; that the last war there were about fourmillions given for that and other extraordinary services; yet the royal navy was less in strength at theend thereof, than.at the beginning, by twenty ships of the line of battle.

2- That the number of ships of the navy of France, which have been taken or destroyed by hermajesty’s ships this war., much exceeds the losses of Britain.

3. That during the present war there have been 175 of the enemy’s privateers taken, and many ofthem of considerable force.

4 . That in the last war which was declared the 7th of May, 1689 , and ended the 10th of Septem-ber, 1697 , the whole number of the enemy’s ships, taken and condemned, were 1296 : whereas intile present ryar, which was declared the 4th of May, 1702, unto the 1 st of December, 1707, the num-ber of ships taken from the enemy, and condemned, amounts to 1345, which carries with it no littledisproportion.

5 . That