I LIKE THE EMPHASIS on the historic relationship between Britain and the United States that Prime Minister Brown made in his speech to Congress, as well as the importance of the gifts he gave the president. The most significant gift Prime Minister Brown gave President Obama was HMS RESOLUTE’s commissioning papers. RESOLUTE and the desk in the Oval Office made from her timbers represent the special relationship between Britain and the States because the ship was a symbolic gift when such a gesture was desperately needed.
    HOWEVER, there seems to be some confusion about the gifts that PM Brown presented, particularly about the pen holder made from the wood of HMS GANNET. Most of the articles I have read, when referring to the pen holder say that the GANNET was a sister ship to HMS RESOLUTE. In my research, I can find no justification for this claim. HMS RESOLUTE was an Arctic exploration ship, powered by sail. Originally a barque named PTARMIGAN, she had been built with private funds for the East India trade, but was purchased for Arctic service by the Admiralty in February 1850 from Mssrs. Smith in Newcastle for the sum of £10,777, and was sent to search for the lost explorer, Sir John Franklin, as soon as she was strengthened for service in the ice.  RESOLUTE was a little over 400 tons, and 115 feet long, in service from 1850 - 1854, 1856-1879.
    The GANNET that was in the Royal Navy in 1852 was built in Britain at Chatham dockyard by the Admiralty,  was 2,590 tons, 213 feet in length, carried 90 guns, and was in service from 1840 - 1863. Another HMS GANNET  was built at Sheerness in 1878, was powered by both sail and steam and had a hull constructed from teak on an iron frame. (This HMS GANNET has recently undergone a £3m restoration and is now on display at The Historic Dockyard Chatham, and could be the source of the wood for the pen holder.) Neither ship resembled RESOLUTE, in either build or service.
        Since 1856 the United States and Britain have been allies, and, though the relationship has been strained a few times since, we have settled our differences through diplomacy, not on the battlefield. That two such great enemy nations made this transition peacefully is something to be celebrated, and honoured. Being allies does not mean that two countries will always, or SHOULD always agree. It not-so-simply means that the disagreements will be aired and hopefully resolved through words, not swords. That $44,000 spent in 1856 for RESOLUTE's refurbishment continues to pay a huge peace dividend today.
    Some of the items I have read in the past few days have focused on the discrepancy between the value of the gifts that Brown and Obama exchanged, claiming that this discrepancy shows the inequality of the relationship between Britain and America. Is the relationship one sided? Over the 150 years since the Americans bought, refurbished, and sailed RESOLUTE back to Britain there have been times when America has given support to Britain, and others when Britain has supported the States. But focusing on that question is, as my mother used to say: putting the em-PHA-sis on the wrong syl-LA-ble, i.e. where it doesn’t belong. Though it is regrettable that the president did not have adequate advise about what would have been appropriate gifts to give to the British prime minister, celebrating and emulating the peaceful change these two enemies made so long ago would make today’s world a better place. There are certainly many countries that need to make a similar transition from being deadly enemies to, if not allies, then at least no longer warring enemies.
     Incidentally, Captain Hartstene, who brought RESOLUTE back to Britain in 1856  must have been a party animal: he over spent his hospitality budget of $4,000 by a further $2,000! Perhaps we need his descendants to visit London and spend their high-valued dollars today to boost the British balance of payments?

WHAT DO YOU THINK?