Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1812-12-10
DOCUMENTS.
NAVY DEPARTMENT.,
18th November, 1912.

Will, iOT tnc nlIOTUotlOn OF tne C0ultnttce
OF the House Of Representatives, of which
SOU are the chairman, certain papers mark
cd A. b. G.. and ID.
Fem the paper A. it appears that 76
gun ship mounting Sc guns, discharges in
one raund 3l76 lbs. of cannon bali that Al
gun trigate, mounting 54 guns, discharges in
Cne round l4SS bs. of Cannon bali that a
96 discharges at one broadside 1888 lbs. and
chat ~ gun frigate, discharges al one
broadside IA lbs. of ball. The que .tion
then arises, what is the intrinsic relati. e
force ola rs and a 44i
Suppose two ~ gun frigates should be
Brought into combat with 76, one on
the larboard, the other on he starboard
quarter. each frigate presenting broadside
vi IA lbs. of ball, will have to contend a.
gajnst battery of 1888 lbs. Of ball A, 744
lbs ist 1888 lbs. 30 would be he relative
metal OF 4 76 and two large ~ gun frigates !;
difference against the frigates 844 lbs. weight
OF metal. 1t is obvious then, that two "A
gun frigates could not contend with 76,
with TIE least probability Of success
Suppose a third frigate, attacking alter
aa'ely On the st rboard and larboard quar-
ter. .honld join in the combat, While two of
the trigates should be operating on one quar-
ter, with IA difference in weight of metal a
~
be conten ling on the other, with difference
against her of ga lbs.
II might be observed that the frigates
would all attack on one quarter, and then
with 1892 lbs. of metal, they would have TO
contend with only 1888 lbs. having Il differ
ence in their favor OF GA ibst In repiv il
may be observed, that three frigates could
not take SUCH position, on any one quarter,
a. would enable them to bring all their broad
Sides TO bear at once upon an object moving
through the water with as much CELEBRITY as
themselves: moreover a frigate would al
yays avoid the broadside ot a 76-for one
well directed broadside from a rs at close
shot. would me VitaDly blow her out of the
@1tcr. Witness the Randolph with the
Yarmouth. FIiga,es would attack in vari-
eus directions, change their positions fire.
aueniiy, and avoid the tremendous battery
OF n 70 as much as possible.
Besides rs is bniit of heavier timber, is
intrinsically much stronger than frigate, IN
ELI hcr works, and cln sustain bartering
much longer and with less injury. A shCr
Which would sink frigate, might be ,eceiv-
ed by 70. with but little mjuyr-it might
pass between wind and water through a
frisate, when it would stick in the frame
of rs. -
All things Considered, it must be admitted
that one 70 gun ship, mounting sc, is egudt
IN combat TO three irigaics mounting 1872
CONS Adniltihg this equality, other cues
tons present themselves for consideration
and ~
LIST. What is the relative expense Of
building and equipping these vessels
I'd. WHAT'S the relative numbers Of their
Crews?
Sd. What is their relative annual ex
pense in actual ,icei
90 ascertain the expense Of build
ing aud equsPping frigate, we
will taAe the actual cost of one
OF our larges VIZ. the Presi-
Sent. which was S 22O,9lO;
fr;gate would then cost S22O.s1o
The cost of 76 cannot be so east
ly ascertained however, from
the papers b and G., we may,
think, esiiiuate the expense Of
building and equipping a rs az
., not exceeding Sss3,on0
The construction then Of force
Ii irlgates, equal i'll combat to a
76 gan ship, would cost g $50. ESQ
baking III this view difference in
favor oft6e Is Of S $40, $50
As+hen s $4,000 - % 8 662, 730,
o. would he the relative expense
OF building and equipping rs.
and a torce IN Irigates equal 90
rs, making difference in fl or
OF the TO- S32o,7so
BY the paper A, it appears that 70 re- /
Snres to man her ESQ men, and that "A
-qlires 400. To man three A. gun Fl,
g. es, or force in frigates equal to a 70.
would then require 1860 men and In tb,s
Respect we find difference in favor of the
10 Of $40 men; hat is, $50 men on boar,
Sf 76 can direct as much free A. 1860
can M board of three frigates.
As TO the relative expense, we
have heretofore estimated texan
nuai Cost of a friga,e of A. guns
At S 10000; and from the best
Information we can obtain upon
the subject, the annual expense
OF a 20 will not exceed 6 7o9 IN
ne annual expense then of three frieate, |
" tor ia trgates equal to z6 would be |
s 33O,UOU while rs would moi cost ~ |
ceealnS . 2O2'l 10; making, in this respect. |
a Inference IN favor If the 70 of g 1917 500
annually,
In examining the relative streneth of fr;.
gates and ships Of war, and Of ships Of var
anil gu boats, we snAll fnd similar re nj,
~ ia'or ul the larger clas, Of vessels.
Hence if the onl, object in view was 70
employ che greatest Intrinsic naval force =,
the least expense should think there would |
be no diihcuiy 90 Gliding that we ouohi r. !
have none but SHIPS Of the greatest maym- |
tnde. Bdt IN providing a naval armamen,
there are other considerations Of the hieh
90 importance We should inquire, what
knd Of force viii, most probably be bro,
against Us win what description Of fore,
Can we meet the enemy, with the gre,fes,
OF success, and afford the mos,
ehectnal protection to our commerce and |
pn IleSe h'ghiy interesting points. / will
Rake The liberty Of submitting very yalo-