The Sun.
London, England, 1854-09-18 00:00:00

SCIENCE OF OFFENCE AND DEFENCE.

A modern traveller gives as a sort of good joke an
anecdote of his meeting, somewhere in the backwoods,
a genuine Yankee—a kind of person who believed that
America could " catawampously claw up the whole
world," and that he (the Yankee) could "catawampously
chaw up" America. The Yankee in question laughed
immeasurably at the idea of England not being able to
hold its own against the miserable Kafirs at the Cape.
He chuckled with intense delight at the idea of the
" Britishers" being successfully opposed by any number
of dark skins. As he saw that his auditor did not ex-
actly enter into the humour of his argument, ho brought
forward a British " regulation musket," which he pro-
fessed to have imported at considerable expense, in order
that he might be able to test experimentally the value of
our weapons of defence or offence. He indicated a trunk
of a tree at some distance, and vowed to his companion
that with the " tarnation musket" there was no possibility
of hitting it. He then took up a revolver, and asked
his friend to mark the result. The consequence was that
not one shot was lost. The moderate proposal of the
Yankee was that the "Queen of the Britishers" should
contract with him for the subjugation of the Cape, and
that he, relying on the contract, would enlist an ade-
quate number of Yankees, all armed with the revolving
rifle, and the thing would be done. There may be some
doubts as to the acceptability of the Yankee's proposal ;
he and his followers might turn out the Kafirs, only,
however, to take their place ; but few persons who have
observed what Americans have done will be inclined to
put limits to what they may do. Six thousand Yankees
with revolving rifles would be able to accomplish more
than we give them credit for. This, however, is not
the question. The point that will—if the war continues
—be mooted very sharply is, are we—warring as we are
with a barbarous Power—making use of all those re-
sources which our intellect, our capital, our wonderful
progress in science, in fact, our immeasurable superiority
over all barbarous Powers—puts into our hands t Are
we not going to war under the old blundering system,
forgetful that science has put into our hands, as it did
into the hands of the Yankee, means of offence and
defence that no barbarous Power ever dreamed of ?

This is a propos of an anecdote narrated by Sir Joseph
Paxton at a dinner which took place last week at the
Crystal Palace. He gave the heads of a conversation
which he had heard between two of the members. of Fox
and Henderson's staff, in which, after referring to what
had been done at the Crystal Palace, one of the interlo-
cutors asked what would be the next great work. The
answer was, " Suppose we contract with the Govern-
ment to take Sebastopol or Cronstadt." It is said that
roars of laughter followed this announcement. But, in
fact, there is nothing laughable in it. We believe in all
earnestness that were George Stephenson alive now,
he would not hesitate to sign a bona fide contract with
Powers like France or England to take any fortress or
lino of fortresses in the.whole world. What are any
or all of the great military engineering achievements
in the whole of Europe compared with the cover-
ing of England with a reticulation of railways ?
Did any twelve thousand troops, under the com-
mand of the most skilful officer, ever accomplish as
much as six thousand " navvies" under the com-
mand of a Stephenson, or a Dargan, or a Peto ? What a
trifle is Napoleon's road over the Simplon compared
with the "engineering difficulties" conquered by plain
working men in half the districtis of civilised Europe !
This is really a serious question. We have old gene-
rals and older admirals going to work with the know-
ledge that they acquired either by experience or by tra-
dition during the last war. But the world has been re-
volutionised since the last war': in every material of
which gunpowder is made, in every material of which
guns ail, made, we know infinitely more than we did at
any period during the last war. The civilians really
possess more .of the knowledge of every material ele-
ment concerned in war than the professional men.
Our admirals know, perhaps, something about steam,
but surely not so much as our engineers. Sir Charles
Napier himself, with commendable modesty, said, in
his last speech before quitting the shores of England,
that under the present system of warfare it would be
impossible to predict the results. All this shows that
the men of the world are beating the mere professional
men. It is a well-known fact that the old military and
naval officers, who are asked as a matter of courtesy
to preside at the scientific examinations which take
place in some branches of the service, are accustomed
to confess honestly to the professors that they know
nothing at all about the matter. But these professors
themselves are only imperfectly acquainted with the
great results that are daily taking place in the fields of
practical science. The enormous extent of the field
over which our practical men of science have to ope-
rate in the present day, gives them knowledge which
could be acquired by no other means. They are in
possession of secrets which are not known to the
world beside. Professional pride ought to give way
before pretensions like these. Why should not our
military engineers submit to take hints from our civil
engineers ? The pen has beaten the sword for the last
three centuries ; let it now have its full scope.
Science will beat brute force now, let the barbarians
do what they may. In sober earnest, the Govern.
ment may be asked why they do not advertise for the
cheapest tenders to take Sebastopol? There is no
doubt that a large' number of engineering firms would
send in estimates.—Daily News.