370 
SILVER MEDAL PRIZE ESSAY, 1893 . 
being piercedand history supports the opinion. At Lissa 1 2 the 
Italian ship Formidable was not penetrated, but was so punished in her 
close action with the forts that she was unable to take part in the sub¬ 
sequent naval battle. At Charleston, on 7th April, 1863, five out of 
the seven especially built “ monitors ” were disabled, although neither 
their “ vital ” nor “ effective 33 targets were penetrated, except in the 
case of the Nahant , which had her steering gear damaged. 
Colonel Clarke, C.M.Gr., R.E., after discussing various types of ships, 
writes : 3 ,“ The inevitable inference from the above analysis of naval 
development is, that the progress of gun-power, and the necessity for 
building ships to fight other ships, has resulted in types of vessels 
which become less and less qualified for engaging coast defences with 
any chance of success. 33 
“In engaging coast defences, however, this powerful weapon (the 
ram) disappears, and the task must be accomplished by the gun alone. 
It is for this reason that the exposure of the personnel of the modern 
ship becomes a factor of the first importance. The crews are, in this 
case, the real f vitals 3 of the ship, and to inflict heavy loss upon them 
will suffice for all purposes.” 
It is clear that ships have little defensive power, but as long as 
Admiral ColomVs ee vital target ” remains intact they can choose their 
position, and can withdraw out of fire when they please. 
Their offensive power lies entirely in the fire of their guns, and gun 
for gun in the same space will probably be greater than that of forts if 
the latter are placed like the ships ( i.e ., on or near the water level), 
because the guns of the primary armament of ships are generally of a 
more advanced type and of a heavier nature than those in forts, while 
concentration and simultaneity of fire are easier. If the fort is pene¬ 
trable, like the casemates of Fort Pharos, Alexandria, or un traversed, 
like Fort Walker, Port Royal, every hit will tell; and in some cases 
even if the fort is armoured beyond actual penetration it may be so 
damaged as to be silenced; for instance, it has been calculated that a 
shot from the 16-in. R.M.L. gun, striking the Dover turret at 2000 
yards range, would have the energy required to lift the whole mass 16 
feet, and it is scarcely conceivable that the turret would remain service¬ 
able after such a blow. 
But hits are not easily made from an unsteady platform, and even 
with accurate shooting, the offensive power of ships lessens consider¬ 
ably if the fort is constructed of earth, is well traversed, and amply 
provided with bomb-proof cover for its garrison, although it may be 
placed near the water level. Then, certainly, the garrison may be 
unable to carry on the combat continuously, but it will be impossible 
to render the fort quite unserviceable. Forts Wagner and Fisher, in 
the American Civil War are convincing examples of this. 
When the forts are at altitudes over 100 feet, the ships* power to 
inflict injury or to drive the garrison from its guns dwindles to almost 
nothing, and disappears entirely if the works are properly constructed 
of earth and the guns are judiciously dispersed. 
1 Attack on Lissa, 1866 ,* Lewis. R,E. Occasional Papers. Yol. XX, 
2 Fortification ,* Clarke, 1890. 
