10,273 for her stores, the ship was
lying untouched and rotting at Portsmouth, and so in various degrees
with other ships. In reply, Welbore Ellis, the treasurer of the navy,
said that though estimates were the usual way of raising money, the
money once raised was spent at the discretion of the admiralty.
Indignant at this amazing statement, Burke flung the smart book of
estimates at the treasury bench. Ships were built of foreign oak of an
inferior kind and needed constant repair; contracts were jobbed; stores
were wasted, stolen, and sold. The country paid for many more seamen
than it got; for example, in September, 1777, the number returned as
victualled was 51,715, though the seamen actually serving were only
47,407. Greenwich hospital, with a revenue of L70,000, was a hot-bed of
abuses.

What was the result of this corrupt system? How did our navy stand in
1778 in comparison with the navies of France, then at war with us, and
Spain, which was on the eve of joining against us? Choiseul's policy of
naval reform was steadily pursued, and in 1778 France had eighty ships
of the line in good order and 67,000 seamen. Spain followed the lead of
France and, when she entered the war in 1779, had about sixty ships of
the line. In 1778 we had 119 first, second, and third rates; of this
number there were, on Sandwich's showing, in November, 1777, excluding
ships on foreign service, only thirty-five manned and ready for sea, and
seven which he said were nearly ready, but some of the thirty-five were
short of their full complement of men, and there was a great scarcity of
frigates. By July, 1778, the number ready was stated as forty-five. But
when Keppel put to sea in June, it was with difficulty that twenty-one
could be got ready to sail with him.[142]

[Sidenote: _BATTLE OFF USHANT._]

Keppel, though an opponent of the government, was appointed to command
the "grand," or, as it was called later, the channel fleet, apparently
at the king's wish. On July 27 he engaged the French fleet from Brest
under Count d'Orvilliers, westward of Ushant, both having thirty ships
of the line. An indecisive action took place, the two fleets passing
each other on opposite tacks and exchanging broadsides. Sir Hugh
Palliser, the third in command and one of the lords of the admiralty,
was blamed for the resultless issue of the engagement. A quarrel ensued
between him and Keppel, which was made a matter of party politics; the
government upheld Pal