New-York tribune., 1879-11-15
ScLENcE ~ HEROINN ~ 81.

The Chilians have not lost their reputation
for seamanship. The complete Diet; oi IN"
naval battle of Point MejilOnes serve to
modifv the Judgment which we expressed when
The earlier accounts, colorcd 10y Spanish inag-
ination and warned by Peruvian symratlics
were received from the lsthmus The engage
meni, instead of dragging on for nearly seven
hours. was over IN two hours and a half. and
during the first hour only one Of the Chlhan
ironclads was under fire. Each was well han
dled. and neither sustained any injuries that are
worth mentioning. The ram was entirely at their
mercy from the first and Their fire was oi-
rected with terrible effect against her most
vulnerable points. After She became unman-
ageabe through the less of her steering
gear they slencod her guns, battered
down her turret, and boarded her III
time to keep her afoat and carry
her into port. 1t was most unequal contest
as the Cbilians had every advantage but they
made no mistakes, and knocked the ram to
pieces after the most approved principles OF
naval warfare. Only one attempt at ram
ming was made by the Huascar, and 1t was
easily evaded, owing to the superiority OF the
Cochranc's twin screws. That her fire was
comparatively harmless so that her formida-
ble adversaTies escaped almost without
scratch, is only partially explained by the fact
that she was unmanageablc. There must have
been prudent seamanship on the other side.
British naval constructors will undoubtedly
derive keen pleasure from perusal OF the
accounts of this sea-fght between ironclads.
The COchrane and the BlancO were brOadsde
vessels heavily armorcd. The plating on their
sides was nine inches in thickness and il was
adequately backed and protected. The cuirass
of the ironcad Hercules is of the same thick
ness, although the backing is somewhat stouter,
and the IRON plating of not more than half IA
dozen war ships in the British navy is heavier.
That two irOnclads should be exposed at
short range to the fire of 3O0-pOunder Arm
strong rifles, without being puncturcd or bat
tered, is Il strong argument in favor of the
English system OF naval architecture. This
sea- fight not only demonstrates the in
vulnerabilty of heavy armor, but the use
lessness of ram when one ironclad
is pittcd against another. After the achieve
ments of the Merrmack in Hampton Roads
the ram was attached to lrOnclads as n power
rul engine of attack. Some of the American
mentors were provided with rams, and tie
naval victory of the Austrian feet al LISA
was attributed to the use of this weapon.
There has been a division of oDinou in respect
to the proper form of ram-bows but naval
constructors have agreed that ironclads
should have some means OF ramuing IN
enemy when under full Roadway. The facll-
ity with which the Huascar's effort 10 dis
able the Cochrane was frustrated shows that
The efficiency of this weapon OF attack has
been Overratod.
Few scenes in naval history are more
thrilling than the hopeless and despairIng
defence of the Peruvian ram. 1t was Law
renee and the Chesapeake over again, and
one can almost fancy that when the heroic
Admiral was carried below to die he breathed
the words: " DON'T give up the ship" The
doom of the Huascar n foregone con-
clusion from the moment she faced her
enemies but her men fought on, one officer
taking command after another, until the flag
was torn down by the enemy.