NA TURE 



[November 26, i( 



precedent and experience. British warships were designed 

 in accordance with "established dimensions," according 

 to which ships of a certain tonnage carried a certain 

 number of guns of specified sizes. The tonnage was 

 estimated by an unscientific rule ; and a competent 

 authority, spealving of the condition of things existing at 

 the beginning of the last century, asserted that " scarcely 

 an individual in the country knew correctly even the first 

 element of one of our numerous ships." As a matter of 

 fact, the official " established dimensions " were varied but 

 little from 1680 to 18 10, and there was practical stagna- 

 tion in British shipbuilding. 



Instead of advance having been made in the practice of 

 naval architecture in this country during the eighteenth 

 century, there is reason to believe that there had been 

 retrogression, 90 far as scientific knowledge and methods 

 were concerned. 



The movement in favour of better education for British 

 shipbuilders and the adoption of scientific methods in ship 

 design a century ago was chiefly due to men unconnected 

 with the industry, and was not welcomed by shipbuilders 

 of the older school. Fortunately, opposition from various 

 quarters was overcome, and the first school of Naval 

 architecture began its work at Portsmouth in January, 

 1811, under the direction of Dr. Inman, a distinguished 

 graduate of the University of Cambridge. The intention 

 was to train men who should unite sound practical experi- 

 ence with high scientific knowledge, to give them emplov- 

 ment subsequently at sea and in the w-ork of ship-design- 

 ing, and so to provide efficiently for the higher ranks of 

 officers at the Admiralty and in the Royal dockyards. 



When the steam-reconstruction of the Navy had to be 

 undertaken about fifty-five years ago, and was rapidly 

 followed by the use of armour as a protection against 

 attack by explosive shells, it became impossible any longer 

 to pretend that naval officers, untrained as naval archite<?ts, 

 could undertake the responsible work of designing British 

 warships. Fortunately, trained men were available in the 

 persons of Dr. Inman 's old pupils, who had been compelled 

 to wait twenty years before their opportunity came. 



Sixteen years elapsed before a second school of naval 

 architecture was established bv the .Admiraltv at Ports- 

 mouth, under the title of the '"' Central School of Mathe- 

 U'atics and Naval Construction." Five years earlier the 

 .^ilmiralty had framed a scheme for schools in the Roval 

 dockyards, at which all apprentices were required to attend 

 " every afternoon for three hours, commencing an hour 

 and a half previous to that at which the yard closes." 

 Under this rule the Admiralty paid the boy's' wages for 

 one-half the period of school attendance, and required them 

 to_ give the other half out of their own time. Beginning 

 with " elementary matters, such as reading, writing, 

 common and decimal arithmetic. Scripture, English history, 

 and geography," the apprentice passed on to more 

 advanced instruction. \X the end of three years a selection 

 was to be made by means of an examination, and those 

 whose abilities entitled them to a higher course of instruc- 

 tion were allowed to attend school for two vears more. 

 For the majority of apprentices this ended their education : 

 but the Admiralty order provided that " two or three of 

 the best apprentices in each yard should be elected to the 

 first^ class, should be instructed in ' laving off ' and the 

 leading principles of ship construction, and, so far as it is 

 necessary for that purpose, should be taught mechanics, 

 hydrostatics, and mathematics." Its main features have 

 been continuously maintained for sixtv-five vears, with 

 results w-hich more than justify any expenditure incurred. 

 As the national standard of elementary education had been 

 raised, so the required standard for the admission of 

 aoorentices h.nd been elevated, and out of the dorkvard 

 schools there had come multitudes of well-educated, Inielli- 

 gent workmen, from amongst whom, by a process of 

 gradual selection, had been found subordinate and principal 

 officers for the .Admiralty service, w'hile no small number 

 had passed from that Service into the private trade, and 

 orcuoied positions of importance and responslbilllv in shio- 

 yards throughout the countrv and on the staffs of the 

 roeistration societies for shioping. of which Llovds' 

 Register is the greatest. The scheme is broad and 

 generous; it gives facilities and aid, while requiring 

 apprentices on their side to study in time that would other- 

 NO. 2039, VOL. 79] 



wise be their own for leisure or recreation, it carries on, 

 side by side, practical and educational training ; it exercises 

 a gradual selection of those whose ability and application 

 show them to be capable of benefiting by higher instruc- 

 tion. It sets up a " ladder of learning " from the lowest 

 level, and there has been no bar to any capable man in 

 striving to reach the highest position. lis cost is extremely 

 moderate in proportion to its beneficial results. For the 

 current financial year the dockyard schools at home and 

 abroad are estimated to cost less than 020oi., while the 

 wages vote for these establishments exceeds two and a 

 half millions sterling. 



The second school of naval architecture constituted the 

 final stage in the .Admiralty scheme for the technical 

 education of its naval architects. Its students were in- 

 tended to be the pick of dockyard apprentices of five years' 

 standing, who during that period had received an excellent 

 general education, a good training in the practice of ship- 

 building, and a special course of mathematics bearing on 

 naval construction. It differed from the first school, there- 

 fore, because the former institution had been intended 

 exclusively for a higher class of apprentices, to whom 

 appointments were guaranteed when their course of train- 

 ing was satisfactorily completed. In other words, the 

 fundamental idea of the first school was to train students 

 who were intended to become superior officers subsequently. 

 On the contrary, the working apprentice class, by a process 

 of selection applied at intervals during five years, was 

 intended to supply the students to be trained in the second 

 school, and they were not guaranteed appointments similar 

 to those promised to their predecessors. 



Cambridge University again supplied a principal for the 

 school of naval construction in the person of Dr. Woolley, 

 who proved a worthy successor to Dr. Inman. During 

 the five years of Its existence men were trained who sub- 

 sequently achieved high distinction in the theory and prac- 

 tice of shipbuilding, and who proved capable of taking 

 up the primary responsibility for warship design when age 

 and failing powers compelled the retirement of men trained 

 In the first school. The grave responsibilities incidental 

 to the Iron-clad reconstruction were borne, and successfully 

 borne, by men from this college for a period of more than 

 twenty years, and it was a fortunate circumstance that 

 the Central School of Mathematics and Naval Construction 

 was in existence even for so brief a period, because its 

 students ably filled the gap that would have otherwise 

 existed in the ranks of trained naval architects at a most 

 critical period in our naval history. 



The third school of naval architecture was founded in 

 1S64, and placed at South Kensington, the Education 

 Department being associated with the .Admiralty in its 

 establishment and maintenance. Its creation was due to 

 the action of the Institution of Naval .Architects, which 

 had been formed In i860 on the joint initiative of naval 

 architects trained for the Admiralty service, of a number 

 of leading private shipbuilders and marine engineers, and 

 of naval officers, yachtsmen, and men of science. In many 

 respects the Royal School of Naval .Architecture and 

 Marine Engineers differed from, and was more compre- 

 hensive than, its predecessors. 



The new school was intended to train students for the 

 private Industry as well as for .Admiralty service. Its 

 founders hoped to attract the sons and relatives of ship- 

 builders and marine engineers, as well as to provide for 

 young men selected by the Admiralty from the dockyard 

 schools. Marine engineering was recognised as the 

 younger sister of shipbuilding, needing equ.allv good and 

 svstematic training for those making it their career. 

 Foreign students were admitted as well as British subjects. 

 The Institution was designed to be, or to become, a school 

 of which the greatest maritime nation of the world might 

 be proud. It started under the fairest auspices ; there was 

 no failure in organisation, courses of study, teachers, or 

 lecturers ; the .Admiraltv plaved its part and sent up well- 

 orepared students ; foreign Governments also sent students, 

 but in regard to private British students there was dls- 

 .Tonolntment. both as to numbers and previous preparation. 

 Whpt should have been the chief source of supplv for 

 Rriflsh students, and for income, failed lamentably. Look- 

 ing hack on the result, it does not appear so surprising as 

 it did at llie time. The scheme of instruction was admir- 



