936 REPORT—1890. 
(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 I 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, [ 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 concerning one or two of them. 
A first-class torpedo boat by Yarrow has a length of 135 feet, a breadth of 
14 feet, a displacement of 88 tons, and with engines of 1,400 indicated horse-power 
attains a speed of a little over 24 knots. 
A slightly larger hoat, 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 
1,550 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 Cesar, 
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 first-rate men-of-war of thirty-five years ago. 
The weight of the engines of the Duke of Wellington and the Cesar would be 
approximately 400 tons and 275 tons, while that of the torpedo boats is about 
34 tons. 
But if these results are sufficiently remarkable, the economy attained in the 
consumption of coal is hardly less striking. 
The consumption of coal in the early steam battle-ships was from 4 to 5 Ibs. 
per indicated horse-power per hour, and occasionally nearly reached 8 lbs. 
At the present time in good performances the coal consumption ranges from 
14 to 13 lbs. per indicated horse-power per hour under natural draught, and from 2 
to 21 1bs. per hour with forced draught. 
In war-ships the engines are designed to obtain the highest possible power on 
the least possible weight, and this for a comparatively short time, and, further, have 
to work at such various powers, that the question of economy must be a secondary 
consideration. 
With the different conditions existing in the mercantile marine, more economical 
results may be expected, and I believe I shall not be far wrong in assuming that 
in special cases 1} lbs. may possibly have been reached; but I have not been able 
to obtain exact information on this head. 
Turning now to the guns, let me refer first to those which were in use thirty- 
five years ago, and which formed the armaments of the ships of those days, and of 
the fortresses and coast defences of the United Kingdom and colonies. 
The whole of these, with the exception of a few very light guns, were made of 
cast-iron. I have already alluded to the small amount of machine work (not of a 
very refined character) expended on them. Although the heaviest gun in use was 
only a 68-pounder, there were no less than sixty different natures of iron ordnance. 
Of the 32-pounder alone there were as many as thirteen descriptions, varying in 
length and weight. Of these thirteen guns, again, there were four separate calibres 
ranging from 6°41 inches to 6:3 inches, and as the projectile was the same for all, 
the difference fell on the windage. This varied, assuming gun and projectile to be 
accurate, from about 0°125 to 0:250, so that it may easily be conceived the diversity 
of the tables of fire for this calibre of gun were very great. And although from the 
simple nature of the guns, and the absence of anything like mechanical con- 
trivance connected with them, it was quite unnecessary to give to them the care 
and attention that are absolutely indispensable in guns of the present day, it must 
ee be supposed that they were altogether free from liability to accident and other 
efects. 
