September i8, 1890J 



NATURE 



-501 



the rude nature I have described, and so far as I can see pos- 

 sessed little, if any, advantage over those of nearly a couple of 

 centuries earlier. It is not improbable that the great success 

 which attended our arms at sea may have contributed to this 

 stagnation. 



The men who with such arms achieved such triumphs, may 

 well be forgiven for believing that further improvement was 

 unnecessary, and it must be remembered that the practice of 

 engaging at very close quarters minimised to a great extent the 

 most striking deficiencies of the guns and their mountings. 



I need scarcely, however, remind you that were two vessels of 

 the old type to meet, one armed with her ancient armament, 

 the other with modern guns, it would be vain for the former to 

 attempt to close. She would be annihilated long before she 

 approached sufficiently near to her antagonist to permit her guns 

 to be used with any effect. 



It would be quite impossible, within reasonable limits of time, 

 to attempt to give anything like an historical account of the 

 changes which have taken place in our ships of war during the 

 last thirty-five years, and the long battle between plates and guns 

 will be fresh in the memory of most of us. The modifications 

 which the victory of one or the other impressed on our naval 

 constructions are sufficiently indicated by the rapid changes of 

 type in our battle-ships, and by the number of armour-clads once 

 considered so formidable, but seldom now mentioned except to 

 adorn the tale of their inutility. The subject also requires very 

 special knowledge, and to be properly handled must be dealt 

 with by some master of the art, such as our Director of Naval 

 Construction. 



Let me now compare with the vessels of the past those of the 

 present day, and for my purpose I shall select for comparison as 

 first-rates the Victoria and the Trafalgar. The Victoria has a 

 length of 340 feet, a breadth of 70 feet ; she has a displacement 

 of about 10,500 tons, an indicated horse-power of 14,244, and 

 she attained a speed on the measured mile of 17^ knots; she 

 has a thickness of 18 inches of compound armour on her turrets, 

 a similar thickness protects the redoubt, and her battery-deck is 

 defended with 3-inch plates. Her armament consists of two 

 l6i-inch iio-ton guns, one loinch 30 ton gun, twelve 6-inch 

 5-ton guns, twelve 6-pounder and nine 3-pounder quick-firing 

 guns, two machine guns, and six torpedo guns. 



The Trafalgar has a length of 345 feet, or very nearly double 

 the length of the Victory, a displacement of 12,000 tons, an 

 indicated horse-power of 12,820, and a speed on the measured 

 mile of a little over 17^ knots. Iler armament consists of four 

 68-ton guns, six 47-inch quick-firing guns, six 6- pounder, and nine 

 3-pounder quick-firing guns, six machine and six torpedo-guns. 



Comparing the armament of the Victoria with that of the 

 Victory, we find, to quote the words of Lord Armstrong — which 

 when evaluatinji the progress we have made will bear repetition 

 — that while the heaviest gun on board the Victo>y was a little 

 over 3 tons, the heaviest on board the Victoria is a little over i lo 

 tons. The largest charge used on board the Victory was 10 lbs., 

 the largest on board the Victoria close on looo lbs. ; the heaviest 

 shot used in the Victory was 68 lbs., in the Victoria it is 1800 

 lbs. The weight of metal discharged from the broadside of the 

 Victory was 1 150 lbs., from that of the Victoria it is 4750 lbs. 

 But having regard to the energy of the broadside, the power of 

 each ship is better indicated by the quantity of powder expended 

 than by the weight of metal discharged, and while the broadside 

 fire from the Victory consumed only 355 lbs. of powder, that 

 from the Victoria consumes 3120 lbs. 



These figures show in the most marked manner the enormous 

 advances that have in every direction been made in the construc- 

 tion and armament of these marine monsters ; but it is when we 

 come to the machinery involved in our first-rates that the contrast 

 between the past and the present is brought most strongly into 

 prominence. 



I have alluded to the simplicity of the arrangements on board 

 the old battle-ships, but no charge of this nature can be made 

 against the present. The Victoria has no less than twenty-four 

 auxiliary steam-engines in connection with her main engines, viz. 

 two starting, two running, eight feed, eight fan, for forced 

 draught, and four circulating water engines. She has in addi- 

 tion thirty steam engines unconnected with her propelling 

 engines, viz. six fire and bilge engines, two auxiliary circulating 

 engines, four fan engines for ventilating purposes, two fresh- 

 water pumping engines, two evaporating fuel engines, one work- 

 shop, one capstan, and five electric-light engines, four air- 

 compressing and three pumping engines for hydraulic purposes. 



NO. 1090, VOL. 42] 



She has further thirty-two hydraulic engines, including two 

 steering engines, four ash hoisting engines, two boat engines, 

 four ammunition lifts, two turret-turning engines, one topping 

 winch, two transporting and lifting engines, two hydraulic 

 bollards, and fourteen other engines for performing the 

 various operations necessary for the working of her heavy 

 guns, making a grand total of eighty-eight engines. This 

 number is exclusive of the machinery in the torpedo and 

 other steam-boats, and of the locomotive engines in the torpedoes 

 carried, which are themselves engines of a most refined and 

 delicate character. 



At an earlier point in my address I alluded to the in- 

 comparable seamanship of our bygone naval officers. Sea- 

 manship will, I fear, in future naval battles no longer 

 play the conspicuous part it has done in times past. The 

 weather-gage will belong not to the ablest sailor, but to 

 the best engineer and fastest vessel, but the qualities of 

 pluck, energy, and devotion to their profession which 

 distinguished the seamen of the past have, I am well 

 assured, been transmitted to their descendants, and I am glad 

 to have the opportunity of expressing my admiration of the 

 ability and zeal with which the naval officers of the present day 

 have mastered, and the skill with which they use, the various 

 complicated, and in some cases delicate machinery which me- 

 chanical engineers have placed in their hands. 



I pass now to a class of vessel — the fast protected cruisers — 

 intended to take the place and perform the duties of the old 

 frigates. Of these I will take as types H.M.S. Medusa and the 

 Italian cruiser Piemonte. The Medusa has a length of 265 feet, 

 a breadth of 41 feet, a displacement of 2800 tons, and her 

 engines have 10,010 indicated horse-power. Her armament 

 consists of six 6-inch breech-loading guns, ten 3-pounders, four 

 machine guns, and two fixed and four turning torpedo tubes. 

 The Piemonte has a length of 300 feet, a breadth of 38 feet, a 

 displacement of 2500 tons, and her engines of 12,981 indicated 

 horse-power developed on the measured mile a speed of 22*3 

 knots, or about 26 miles. Her armament, remarkable as being 

 the first instance of an equipment composed altogether of quick- 

 firing guns, consists of six 6-inch loo-pounders, and six 47-inch 

 45-pounders, all with large arcs of training, ten 6-pounder 

 Hotchkiss, four Maxim-Nordenfelt machine-guns, and three 

 torpedo guns. 



These vessels have a steel protective deck, with sloping sides 

 from stem to stern, protecting the vitals of the ship ; above and 

 below the armour-deck the vessels are subdivided into a large 

 number of water-tight compartments, and a portion of the 

 vessel's supply of coal is employed to give additional protection. 



With respect to the Piemonte the engines (vertical triple 

 expansion) were designed and constructed by Messrs. Hum- 

 phreys, Tennant, and Co. They are, in order that they may 

 be wholly below the water line, of exceedingly short stroke. 

 (27 inches), and the behaviour of the engines, both on their 

 trials here and in the very severe weather to which the vessel 

 was exposed on her passage out, amply justify these eminent 

 engineers in their somewhat bold experiment. 



I might describe other cruisers, both larger and smaller than 

 those 1 have selected, but I must not fatigue you, and will only 

 in this part of my subject draw your attention to these triumphs 

 of engineering ingenuity and skill, I mean the torpedo boats, 

 which (whether or not locomotive, torpedoes continue to hold 

 their own as engines of destruction), are destined, I believe, to 

 play no insignificant part in future naval warfare. 



Let me illustrate the marvels that have been achieved by the 

 great English engineers who have brought these vessels to their 

 present state of perfection by giving you a few particulars con- 

 cerning one or two of them. 



A first-class torpedo boat by Yanow has a length of 135 feet, 

 a breadth of 14 feet, a displacement of 88 tons, and with engines 

 of 1400 indicated horse-power attains a speed of a little over 24 

 knots. 



A slightly larger boat, built for the Spanish Government by 

 Thorneycroft, has a length of 147 feet 6 inches, a breadth of 14 

 feet 6 inches, and with engines of 1550 indicated horse-power, 

 has attained a speed of a little over 26 knots. 



It is interesting to note that the engines of the first-named 

 torpedo boat develop nearly exactly the same power as those of 

 the 90-gun ship, the Casar, and the engines of the second-named 

 but little less than that developed by the Duke of Wellington, 

 two vessels which you will remember I have taken as types of 

 the second- and firsl-rate men-of-war of thirty-five years ago. 



