ing upon it we must, however, present to our readers a remarkable letter, the intrinsic interest of which will be doubted by no one. It has never before been published. The original, which now lies before us, was obtained for us by a friend from Mr Lynall Thomas, to whom it is addressed.
It is not a little remarkable to find the great apostle of peace so far accepting the inevitable as to discuss the right method by which a nation can provide itself with the weapons of war. But our motive for giving the letter here, and now, is twofold. First, Mr Cobden states in this letter with admirable force the precise position which we ourselves take up with regard to the very distinguished head of the great Elswick firm. Secondly, he carries much further than the United States Commissioners the principle of depending upon the inventive talent and the manufacturing power of the country generally.
It was, of course, to be expected that he would do so. In this paper we are especially anxious to limit ourselves simply to showing that the existing system, as it has been practically worked for the last twenty or five-and-twenty years, is utterly unsatisfactory. We are certain that a searching investigation is necessary, and we think that it is far better to leave it to the investigating body to determine what system should be for the future pursued by us – whether we adopt the present French system, which, in the judgment of the American Commissioners, is theoretically perfect, or discover some better.
While, therefore, we fully recognise the inconveniences which, as they point out, might arise if there was no State establishment to control and regulate supply, we think that Mr Cobden's view ought very seriously to be considered. We can wish nothing better than that all the Chambers of Commerce in the country would follow his advice, and petition for a searching inquiry into the whole question at the present moment, when in any case vast sums of money must be spent upon supplying us with a proper armament, such as the urgent exigencies of our present situation demand.
Letter from Mr Cobden.
"Midhurst, 5th Aug. 1864.
"Dear Sir, – I have only to-day received your letter and enclosure on my return from London.
"I can easily understand the unfairness to which you are exposed. Armstrong must have been more than a man – he must have been a very angel of disinterestedness and justice – if he could have felt really disposed to favour your success, while his own fame and emolument depended on the triumph of his rival invention. I see no other way of reaching this evil but in the way I proposed – namely, establishing the principle that the Government shall not be its own producer, and then the purchasing
before the Lord Chief Baron (Sir Fitzroy Kelly) and a special jury, 19th February to 10th March 1877. Transcript of the Shorthand Notes of Messrs Hurst & Hurst, 40 Chancery Lane, W.C.
Thomas v. The Queen. (Before Mr Justice Mellor and Mr Justice Lush.) Judgment, &c., 25th July 1877. Transcript of the Shorthand Notes of Messrs Hurst & Hurst, 40 Chancery Lane, W.C.
"Statement of the case of Thomas v. The Queen."
"Mr Lynall Thomas and the Ordnance Department." 'United Service Gazette,' in consecutive weeks from August 2, 1884.
