The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1901-03-03

/
schools of tactics. one of which aimed at
the hull, to break down the fire of the hos
tile ship and destroy her fighting men.
while the other sought. by pointing higher.
to cut away the sails. rigging. and masts
rendering the foe helpless. The latter. in
general, was the policy of the French: the
former and. 1t may be affirmed. the more
surely successful, was the practice of the
British. The two schools find their coun-
terpart in the tactical considerations
which now affect the question of rapid-fire
and of heavy guns each of which has its
appropriate target. covering in the latter
case the motive power, in the former the
personnel.
These three leading classes of vessels,
with their functions. ornaments. and tao
tics of the single ship, as described. per-
formed in their day and during the great
maritime contests of two centuries all the
duties that at any time can be required OF
a maritime fighting organization. BY them
the control of the sea in the largest sense
was disputed and was determined; by
them commerce was attacked and by them
it was protected They themselves have
passed away, but the military factors re-
main the same. The mastery of the sea
and the control of its commerce-of which
blockade is but a special case--are now
and must remain always the chief ends of
maritime war. The ends continuing the
same the grand disposition of navies-
their strategy-reposes upon the same
principles that it ever did. Similarly,
while the changes in the characteristics
of will tka IND
be fought in manners different from its
predecessors, the handling of masses of
ships In battlefield tactics-must proceed
on the same general principles as OF old.
The centre and the two extremities of all
orders are always the points of danger;
concentration upon one or two of the
three, however effected, must be always
the principle of action. These things,
which cannot vary, form, therefore, no
part of a paper which deals with
changes.
THEY HAD THEIR BREAKD0wNS THEN, TOO.
There should be added for the general
public the caution that the difficulties, the
imperfections. and the frequent hating
state of ships of war in commission for
sea service at the present day are no new
things. To the naval historian. familiar
with the correspondence of the past. they
are the inevitable attendants OF all Cow
er1ment action, wherein the most econom-
ice, methods are always dominated. his
torically by considerations of expediency
which are political In character The ne
cessity of keeping the public in good hu-
NOR. and of not laying open points upon
which opposition can enlarge, induces APP
parent economies. which sacrifice not only
true economy. but the best results This
is a great evil, as yet apparently insepa-
rable from public enterprises as distin-
guished from private ones. If anyone sup
poses that the ships with which Great
Britain overthrow Napoleon, and with
which Nelson and his contemporaries won
their as yet unparalleled Victories were
always or generally in good material con-
dition, he is greatly mistaken. What is
different in our day. apparently. is a ten
dency in ships to rely for their repairs and
material efficiency more upon dockyards
and workshops than upon their own re-
sources; a disposition also to be unduly
discouraged by imperfecdons in the mo-
tive enginery. War viii correct this, or
war will fail In maintaining efficiency
while keeping the sea quite as much as
in fighting skill. lay the supreme excel
lence of officers Ike Nelson and Jervis
Men now ought to appreciate better than
they do what difficulties of this sort sea-
men underwent a hundred years ago. and
how they refused 10 yield to them. THE
difference between myself and the French
the Duke of Wellington is re-
ported to have said. was as when a man
starts on a journey with a new harness. |
What If something gives way, as in war
something is sure to go wrong? Shall you
hitch up the break with bit of rope or
comes handy and go on That
is what | did
The succession Of cause and effect which
has produced the present ship of war will
be traced in rapid outline, in order to
leave as much room as may be for the de-
scription of the essential features of the
ship herself as she now exists.
Two chief factors concur to ship of
power and fighting power
The displacement of sails by engines. and |
the progressive development Of the latter. |
are features of the general progress of the |
century. The engines of ship of war are |
differentiated from those of merchant |
ships chiefly b. the necessity of protec-
ton. This affects their design. which |
Of being as far as possible below the water
line. The further great protection now af-
forded is incident rather to the use and |
development of armor as a part Of the
lighting power
Fighting power divides into offensive
and defensive. Armor now represents the
latter. The fighting ship in every age is
he product of the race between the two
and in the present century this has been
Unprecedented in the ground covered and
IN the rapidity of the pace, due To the in
creased power OF dealing with materials,
already alluded to.
CONTEST OF ARMOR AND PROTECTIVE.
The modern contest began with the in
Of horizontal shell fire in the
third decade of the century This term
must be explained 1t has been said that
all ships guns up to 1915 threw non-ex-
llosive prOjectles. In practice this is true,
Nelson alludcs to certain shell
supplied to him for trial. which he was
to use because he wished not to
burn bis prizes. but to take them alive
A shell is a hollow proiectile flied with
powder, the idea Of which is that upon
'eaching the enemy it will burst into sew /
rial pieces. each capable of killing a man.
and the flame not impossibly setting
woodwork on fire. 1t was necessary that
he powder within should not explode
rom the combustion of the cartridge OF
he gun. for If it did its force, combined