New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-02-03

In que sticn actually were but the species OF how
itzcrs alluded 70. The TRIBUNE hsd guessed the
secret of the my siihcat'on under which ell Great
Britain labored for hearty two months
RIVE hsve more than once had OCCASION to
oao,e the work Of Sir Howard Douglas 90 Naval
Gupntry, the ackIosledeei standard work upon
the subject. Sir Howard, although be writes on
naval tIeme,is an off .er ia tue R)ysl Artillery,
and equally competent to give an opinion
on land. warfare. His celebrated book
hss Just been published ia new edition, aug
uepted BY an appendix, stating no" far the ex-
periepce Of the present war has confirmed or YER
ri6ed tie views hitherto held upon naval warfare
and including also general critique Of the mill
tsry operations in tie East. We may justly say
that, with the exception Of some facts hitherto
unknown, and accessibe 20 the author BY his Of
fetal position only there is not word IN his
treatise which bad not been anticipated months
AGO. by the military articles Of THE TRIBUNE.
The ibeffciency Of fleets against casemated forts,
IL we'll constructed and well defended is espe-
cially and prominently asserted in the case OF
both Bomarsund and Sevastopol. The useless
se.s of shells against masonry, exhibited by US
LONG $50 while none Of Sir Towards former edi-
tons said word upon the subject, is now stated
upon the faith of official reports from msrsInd.
Our opinion, that in towers and casemated forts
Ike those of Bomarsund, breach could only be
made by heavy siege batteries, of at least 81
FOUNDERS long guns, heavy enough to stand strong
charges with solid shot, and firing always upon
the same spot Just as in the old method of breach
ing. while the insecurity of aim from aboard
,hp could never produce breach before the
-hps were destroyed-tbis opinion is entirely
confirmed by Douglas in series OF details of the
hishest military interest, but which we refrain
from repeating, the capture Of Bomsrsund being
now very old affair As TO the Crimean cam
psen, Douglas but reiterates our criticisms,
softened, of course, by the influence of his posi-.
tion as an EDglishman and British officer under
the COMMANDMENTS Still he comes to the
same result: the expedition was undertaken with
too weak force, whence the incomplete victory
at the Alma, and the haDk-march to Biliklaya
fsult in itself, but caused by the apparent neces
sty of placing the army in a strong defensive po-
stion against any attack from the rear, whereby,
however, the north eide of the fortress was left
uninvested and the besiegers we're placed in the
condition of being besieged in their turn. In
fact, taking all the main points Of Douglass crti
cisu-eyen those based upon facts b1ricd in Off
cial unpublished correspondence-it is seen
that, with incomplete end contradictory evil
dence to work upon, and while events had not as
yet, developed all their consequences, THE
TRIBUNE managed to come to the same results
which he now obtains after the fact aud from SUI
ptrior and unpublished sources of information.
This corrOboiaton Of our judgment on ques-
tons of so great military importance, may be
verified by an examination of the appendix to
the new edition Of Sir Howards work. TIE
support Of so eminent an authority affords US
qualification, which we may surely be pardoned
for thus r, ferriDg to.