August 3, 1905] 



NA TURE 



trenails. Before this era English models had fallen 

 sadly behind those of our chief rivals. It was by 

 hard fig-hting, not by superiority or even equality 

 of design, that victories were gained for our arms. 

 Creuze, in his "Treatise of Naval .Architecture," 

 published in 1846, speaks of the inferiority of British 

 ship design, quoting Charnock to the same effect. 

 " When an English fleet was in chase of a French 

 fleet it was ships which were British built that fell 

 into our possession ; but almost on every occasion^ the 

 French .ships could evade ours. The losses sustained 

 in the French Navy by foundering at sea, or by 

 wrecks were principally those ships which had been 



ment of the Institution of Naval Architects this im- 

 provement is mainly due; and, since its foundation 

 in i860, the application of scientific principles to ship 

 design has made progress rapid beyond all precedent. 

 Annual meetings bring together the leading mem- 

 bers of the profession for the interchange of ideas, 

 and in the Transactions of the institution may be 

 found memoirs bv the best authorities on all subjects 

 connected with the science of naval architecture. 



It is well to remember, however, that, whilst there 

 is much room for congratulation, the need for effort 

 towards progress still exists, and perhaps to a greater 

 degree than ever. For long after the introduction 



.— N.ivy Office, June 

 151 ft. 33 in.; breadth 

 shows the vessel as altered 



iel Victory. Length on t 

 :o ft. 6 in.; depth in hold, ■ 



gun decks, 186 ft. ; Length of the keel for tonnage 



the dotted outlii 



of Steam propulsi'on, Great Britain, as the leading 

 shipbuilding nation, held a position not seriously chal- 

 lenged. We gave examples to the rest of the world; 

 others took their practice from us. Of late, however, 

 our supremacy has been attacked. There are ship- 

 yards and marine engine works, many of them splen- 

 didly equipped, in all the most important countries, 

 and' we may depend every effort will be made to em- 

 ploy them fully and develop them further. The naval 

 Powers are determined to construct their navies 

 within their own domains, and some foreign Govern- 

 menf; are giving inducements to shipowners and 

 shipbuilders of a substantial nature, and such as are 



taken from us. On the contrary, the favourite ships 

 in our fleets were those which had been taken froni 

 the French, and the instances in which French ships 

 in our service were ever recovered possession of by 

 them were extremelv rare ; we as far exceeding them 

 in all that related to the manoeuvres and manage- 

 ment of ships as they did us in designing them." 

 .\s is well known, the Foiidroyant, a two-deck ship 

 captured from the French in 1758, served as a model 

 for a new class, or, again to quote Creuze, " a very 

 superior class of man-of-war which was adopted." 



It was not, however, with the abandonment of 

 wood that England ceased to follow the lead of 

 France in ship construction. We 

 remember that the first iron-clad 

 ocean-going war vessel, La Gloire, 

 was French ; and Sir William 

 White in 1887 said, " it must be 

 frankly admitted that the lead 

 taken by the French on both the 

 steam and ironclad reconstructions 

 was the primary cause of most sub- 

 sequent activity in warship build- 

 ing." 



We dwell on this point because F.G. 2.-Na>T Office, September 30, 1795- Sheer draught of 36;gun frigate -Sj''''"- J;'"?''' °" 

 ■ ^ .,, ~ ^ ., ■, t 1 .• lower deck laS ft. lo in.; length of the kee for tonnage, 124 ft. Oi' in.; breadth extreme, 39 It. 7 



It illustrates the evil of neglecting S,^moulded^8flI. in.1 depth in hold, 13 ft. 3 in.; burthen in tons. No. 1033SS. 



the application of scientific prin- 

 ciples to practical affairs. Happily, 

 since the period to which "we have referred 

 Great Britain has done much to remove the 

 reproach under which she formerly rested. The 

 labours of Scott-Russell, Rankine, William Froude, 

 and many others raised ship design in this 

 country to a position of which we may well 

 be proud. Some of the later workers, like the 

 late William John, have passed away, but, happily, 

 the majority — and we may cite the author of the 

 paper as among the most distinguished — are still 

 with us. It is fair to add that it is to the establish- 



not offered in this country. It is well to remember 

 that Germanv for some time past has not only 

 possessed, but has constructed within her own 

 domains, the mercantile vessels which hold the 

 premier position in the world. 



In shipbuilding, as in nearly all other manufactur- 

 ing industries, we must neglect no chances. To de- 

 sign a complex structure such as a high-class 

 modern steamship needs an amount of accurate 

 knowledge intelligently applied— that is to say, an 

 amount of science — which is only within the com- 



NO. 1866, VOL. 72] 



