The Sun.
London, England, 1860-09-15 00:00:00

IRON- UASED S HIPS.

The Moniteur de la Flotte has taken up the sub •
ject of Iron-cased Ships, to which we adverted on
Monday last, and has presented us with what we
presume are the prevailing opinions on the other
side of the Channel. Unfortunately, the French
journal is totally silent on the points to which
most interest attaches. We are told that the
Gloire is a magnificent specimen of naval
architecture, imposing to behold, and terrible to
contemplate ; that she performs well both in
smooth water and a heavy sea ; that her speed
exceeds 13 knots an hour ; and that, in short,
she is a complete success. It seems that the
confidence of her architect in laying down several
specimens of this class before assuring himself of
the results by an experimental launch provoked
some censure, but it is now affirmed that his auda-
city has received an entire justification in the per-
formance of the Gloire. We are then favoured
with some reflections on this achievement. The
Moniteur de la Flotte reminds us that twice within
these ten years has England been surpassed by
France in machines of maritime war. In 1850 the
Napoleon gave us the first example of those screw
ships of the line which eclipsed all other men-of-
war, and now, before we have well succeeded in fol-
lowing our leaders, a new element of infinitely
greater power is introduced into the question, which
must set us at work once more.

The artiele before us, however, simply begs the
whole question at issue. We want to know not
what an invulnerable ship may be expected to do
in naval warfare, but whether an invulnerable ship
has been actually produced. We can perfectly un-
derstand that the Gloire is a fine specimen of her
class, and vastly superior to any of the old floating
batteries. We can also imagine that the French
have succeeded very cleverly in combining great
solidity of structure and heavy tonnage with un-
usual speed and real beauty of form. That is just
the kind of problem which French naval architects
would be likely to solve, for there are no more in-
genious shipwrights in the world than those across
the Channel. But this is not a question of mere
ingenuity, or even of shipbuilding. It is a question
of iron manufacture combined with the manufacture
of artillery. The point to be ascertained is whether
a ship's side can be covered with armour impene-
trable to cannon shot, and of this we have no proof
except in the evident satisfaction of the French
themselves. As the Emperor Napoleon is building
iron-cased frigates instead of ships of the line, we
must, of course, presume that the French engineers
have formed their conclusions, and that they have
definitely reported in favour of the new system to
the prejudice of the old. This, however, does not
decide the question. We are not told, nor do we
know, how the Gloire was tried ; nor to what
tests she was subjected, nor with what kind of
artillery the experiments were made. All, we
know is that our own experiments have not, as
far as their results have been published, warranted
any similar decision. One description of armour
alone has been hitherto found successful in pro-
tecting a ship from the effects of rifled cannon,
and that is not the kind of armour in which the
Gloire is sheathed. Even in this case the test is
still imperfect, for it remains to be seen whether a
concentrated broadside might not accomplish what
single shots had failed to effect.
Nevertheless, we are ready to admit that this
very experiment shows how practicable the attempt
may really be. When we read, as in our Naval
Intelligence of yesterday, that a target has actually
been manufactured with so protected a piece of
woodwork representing a ship's side as to leave it
" perfectly undisturbed by the severe firing to
which it was subjected," we can no longer deny
that an invulnerable ship may be a possi-
bility. Such a machine may perhaps be produced ;
the question is whether the French have pro-
duced it. They themselves have no doubts about
their success, but we cannot profess equal cer-
tainty in the matter. If our neighbours are right,
and if their artillery is as powerful as ours, we
can only conclude that they have excelled us in
the manufacture of iron plates—a supposition
which our engineers would not be very willing to
accept. Indeed, on a balance of probabilities,
we must needs think it more likely that the French
cannon were inferior to the Armstrong gun than
that British iron has been surpassed in strength by
that of French manufacture. To be sure, there is
one more alternative open to us, and that is to sup-
pose that in the application or adjustment of these
plates there is a trick essential to the success of the
experiment which we have not discovered, but the
hypothesis is not,very probable.
On one point, however, the remarks of onr
French contemporary are certainly justifiable. The
administration of our navy has been always.
unhappily compounded of obstructiveness .
precipitation, Our Boards of' Admiralty either
resist inventions to the utmost, as in the case of
carronades and screw propellers, or plunge head-
long into a new theory, as in the casetheyof iron
steamers. We are not prepared to say that
have been unduly cautious on the present occa-
sion, for we do not yet professs to see our way
clearly, but the precedent of
apropos that we can feelno
tollB6o. If the Admi-
ralty 8o appears
so very
surprise when the
French journalist applies .rd
should at last de
must be steel-plated, and ethat all ships-of-war"
promulgate the conclusion
exactly at the time that the French have got a fleet
of these vessels ready for sea, it would be much in
accordance with former passages of our history. we
should then have the alarm sounded in earnest and
after a couple of years panic and tremendous exer-
tions, should find ourselves a match for our neigh-
bours just when they were striking out a new line
once more. That is our system—perhaps our des-
tiny. We are less inventive, it is said, than other
people, but more capable of improving upon inven-
tions. If this is the case things will come right in
the end, provided only we are not left too far in the
rear, and all we have to do is to keep ourselves
open to reason, eschew prejudice, and waste no
time.
It may seem like a piece of ironical pleasantry
on the part of the French journal to speak of all
this rivalry as a " pacific contest," increasing rather
than exhausting the wealth of nations. That is not
exactly the reflection suggested by the study of our
Navy Estimates, or likely to arise from a fresh
" reconstruction" of our Fleet. There is really,
however, a foundation of truth in the remark, and
this last invention of iron-cased frigates goes far to
bring it out. We have been for some time perfect-
ing the manufacture of artillery before which, as
we flattered ourselves, no ship could stand. We
shall now, if this new theory approves itself, begin
elaborating the manufacture of ships against which
all artillery will be useless. As a final result, there-
fore, presuming both nations to be equally success-
ful, France and England will have contrived at an
enormous cost to construct two navies between
which a combat will be impossible. If no ship of
either nation can ever be taken, sunk, or damaged,
it is rather difficult to see what form maritime war
can take, and, as the same armour which renders
ships invulnerable can be applied to fortifications on
shore, the attack of land forts will clearly beconaeo3,
hopeless under{aking. If, in abort, the theory
iron-cased frigates can_ be established, it wIlIP"