The Sun.
London, England, 1858-12-18 00:00:00

SIR CHARLES NAPIER ON THE NAVY.

On Wednesday the weeklymeeting of the Society
of Arts was held—Admiral Sir Charles Napier,
K.C.8., in the chair. The paper read was " On the
Modifications which the Ships of the Royal Navy
have, undergone during the Present Century in re-
spect of Dimensions, Form, Means of Propulsion,
and Powers of Attack and Defence," by Mr. E. J.
Reed. The author began by observing that the
science of naval architecture was so greatly ad-
vanced on the Continent and so much neglected in
England during the last century, that the form,
dimensions, and speed of the ships of the British
navy were for the most part inferior to those of
every nation with which they had to cope; indeed,
the only mode of impcovement which the naval
authorities of that period countenanced was that of
imitating the forms of such captured vessels as were
deemed superior to our own. The tendency then
was greatly to overburthen vessels • this was one
of the greatest difficulties with which our naval
commanders had to contend. Mr. Reed touched
upon the causes of some of our naval disasters
during the American war, and then passed to the
improvement in construction introduced by Sir R.
Steppings, whom he thought deserving of much
credit. The unfavourable influence exercised, in
Mr. Reed's opinion, by Sir Wm. Symonds, while
surveyor of the navy, was then pointed out ; his
opposition to the use of the screw propeller, now
so universally adopted,having considerably retarded
our naval progress. The introduction of iron for
ships of war had been, in the author's opinion,
rashly conducted, for in 1843 the Admiralty had
commenced building iron ships, and in three years
built and purchased 18 such vessels, at a cost of
about £680,000. This material, ho*hver had been
found to possess many disadvantages„ Tie effect of
shot upon it had been found to be destructive, and
the bottoms of ships built of it were found to get
rapidly foul. The author then passed on to describe
the state of the navy during the late Russian war,
and maintained that the spectacle of one Rus-
sian fleet sunk by Russian hands at Sebastopol, and
of another trembling behind stone fortresses in the
shallow waters of Cronstadt, was one the record of
which wo certainly might recall without shame. He
then gave a rapid review of the present state of our
nervy, and expressed his opinion that floating bat-
teries had met with undeserved condemnation. The
subject of the steam ram, which had attracted con-
siderable public attention, was then discussed, the
author's opinion being that it would be found to be
so unwieldly in its character that ships would have
no difficulty in avoiding collision with it. In con-
clusion, Mr. Reed maintained that while it must be
allowed that considerable improvements might be
made in the construction of our ships, yet that such
alterations would prove enormously expensive, be-
sides being of very questionable policy; for by
eagerly arming ourselves with all the warlike agen-
cies which science has placed at our disposal, we
might certainly make our navy most terrible; but
we should at the same time, by the very prepon-
derance of our might, compel all other powers,
secretly at least, to make common cause against us,
and thus prepare the way for universal strife. On
the other hand, if we contented ourselves with vigi-
lantly observing the changes which other powers
made, and adopting only such improvements as
were necessary to keep alive that wholesome re-
spect which all nations now felt for us, we should
neither encourage ambitious powers by our weak-
ness nor alarm timid powers by our strength, but
should continue to stand a solid and impregnable
bulwark, in the shelter of which men might peace-
fully work out their highest and noblest destinies.
The CHAIRMAN said it was his duty to propose a
vote of thanks to Mr. Reed for his paper, which he
must say was drawn up with great - ability, and
contained much valuable information. before
doing so, however, he would make a few observa-
tions upon one point of the paper especially, in
order that it might not go forth to the public
that we had the large available naval force there
spoken of. Mr. Reed had stated that the fleet of
screw steam ships consisted of 51 line-of-battle
ships, each armed with 8-inch shell guns and 32-
pounder solid shot guns, &c. Mr. Reed, in making
that statement, undoubtedly meant that they had
built and launched 51 sail of the line. He could
not mean to convey that there was that force ready
for service at the present day. He (the chairman)
sincerely wished there was, and then all their fears
about invasion would be groundless. He believed

there was not more than half that number. Of
course he alluded to screw line-of-battle ships ;
because he regarded all sailing ships of war as so
much waste timber, and the sooner they got rid of
them the better. Mr. Reed had very truly said
that what was required was a well-manned Channel
fleet, and with that we could set at defiance all the

powers of Europe. But the difficulty was to get
such a fleet—he meant a fleet manned by really
efficient seamen. A Royal commission was now
sitting with a view to find out what were the real

grievances of the sailors, and what was the— reason

they did not readily enter the navy. He believed
that commission would very shortly make its re-
port, and he trusted that the Government would
pay attention to it, emanating as it would from
able and experienced officers, and not throw it
aside, as had been done with the last report made
to them. A good Channel fleet was what he had
always contended for ; and he would point out in
a very few words how it could be. obtained. They
probably all knew that he (the chairman) had both
publicly and privately—in the House of Commons
and elsewhere—done his utmost to induce the
Government to get up a Channel fleet of only ten
sail of the line. He only asked for a fleet of that