56 ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY. 



to this that if a shore fort is mounted with the most powerful gun 

 yet discovered, and the Warrior chooses to run close under its walls, 

 she may get her sides knocked in, but that is all. If she keeps at 

 merely 700 yards' distance, she is, as far as we know at present, 

 quite safe, whereas it is perfectly well understood that at twice or 

 thrice that range she could pitch her own shells into any fortress or 

 arsenal. This leaves the case of ships against guns in no bad posi- 

 tion for the former. 



" It seems to have been forgotten that ships encounter ships as well 

 as forts, and that in the former contest the guns have as yet been 

 beaten hollow by the best models of armor. No ship's gun yet pro- 

 duced would be effective against a first-rate iron-cased ship. Mr. 

 Whitworth has made the greatest progress in this direction. His 

 70-pounder might really be carried in a ship's battery, but then his 

 70-pounder has never pierced the Warrior target. It has only pierced 

 a target of four inches of wood plated with four inches of iron. It is 

 a most valuable weapon, for it would be an effective arm against all 

 imperfectly cased vessels, or, in other words, against most of the 

 armored ships now afloat ; but there are ships that can keep out its 

 shot. All through the contest, in short, there runs this dilemma, that 

 a gun meant to pierce the Warrior's sides is either too light for its 

 purpose or too heavy to be carried at all. Of course, it is not to be 

 assumed that the carrying powers of ships may not be extended. It 

 is possible, perhaps probable, that before long we may have a vessel 

 produced which will carry a seven-ton gun, but that is not the case at 

 present, and we must take things as they are, not as they may be. 

 As matters now stand, it is only a shore gun that can pierce the War- 

 rior's sides, and that only within a very short range. 



"\Ve have no wish to conceal our opinion of the capabilities of ord- 

 nance in the hands of able inventors. We think it not at all unlikely 

 that Mr. Whitworth's last gun may be found effective when tried at 

 a longer range, and perhaps equal efficiency may some day be ob- 

 tained from a more portable piece. But these are not the questions 

 now before us. We have been dealing solely with results actually 

 established, and these, though they demonstrate undoubtedly the re- 

 sources of artillery science, do certainly not prove, as a general prop- 

 osition, that guns have won the day against ships. Taking a ship's 

 battery against a ship's armor, we find the superiority on the side of 

 the latter, for we have frigates actually afloat which can resist any 

 gun yet tried of proportions available for naval service. That is the 

 present state of the case. It may be altered to-morrow, but it leaves 

 our first-rate ironsides in a very fair position to-day." 



Capt. Dalilgren's Views. Capt. Dahlgren, the well-known Amer- 

 ican authority on naval ordnance, etc., in a recent report to the Sec- 

 retary of the Navy, December, 1862, thus expresses his views in 

 regard to the construction of armor-plated vessels, and their defen- 

 sive qualities : 



After referring to the results of the English experiments above 

 given, he says: "It would be unwise to rush to the conclusion that 

 armor is needless because the most powerful ordnance should, under 

 skilful guidance, be able to pierce it. For even against such cannon 

 a ship may delay the conclusive difficulty long enough to make its 



