be; and there is nothing but a multitude of penetrating guns which will make torpedo attack sufficiently risky to prevent it. It is the very absence of this preventive, which makes the monitor-class so tempting to the sneaking torpedoist. The corvette is even more open to these attacks than larger ships; for her lighter draught of water will push her closer in during times of blockade. But let it be known that, as well as a good look out, and giant bull's-eyes to scan suspicious surroundings, she has a numerous artillery ready for instant service, and the light and cheap torpedo vessel will think once or twice before she hazards an attack. The corvette should also be armed with at least two mitrailleuses, whose office it would be to represent short range shrapnel. The Gatling is an admirable weapon of its kind, but it is not so suitable for naval purposes as it might be. I have seen a mitrailleuse by L. Christophe of Brussels, which appeared to me a much more serviceable weapon for ships and boats, inasmuch as it could either be fired in single shots like the Gatling, or in a volley of 31 shots at a time, like the original mitrailleuse. Anyone watching the fire of the Gatling from a ship or boat in motion, must be aware that a very small number of rifles, I think seven, will equal its effect, as pauses must be made, almost between every shot, to relay. But in the rapid approach of torpedo boats, successive volleys accurately directed, will be much more effective than the somewhat wild fire of the Gatling under such conditions. In the corvette, and all the smaller classes of ships, where space below water is so important for boiler power and coal stowage, I think I should introduce in their engines an old principle in a new way. When the screw was first introduced, multiplying gearing was employed because it was not known how to get the requisite number of revolutions out of the engines. The plan was given up, partly because of the difficulties of multiplying gearing, but chiefly because gearing was no longer necessary. But now, when the number of revolutions of the engine can be so greatly increased, it seems to me that we should utilise that capacity. If the piston of a given engine travels twice as fast as it did before, it is certain that a cylinder of half the size will do the work of the original engine, subject of course to certain losses. But as weight and space are the two difficulties in the design of a war ship, anything which diminishes them may be freely accepted so long as no more than diminution of weight and space is developed. In another matter connected with the smaller class of vessels, the sloops, I have arrived at very definite conclusions. Without a certain relative draught of water, these smaller vessels would not fulfil their places even in peace time, and for the operations of blockade or attack on enemy's ships in shoal water, would be more or less ineffective. I think the sloop class ought not to draw more than 10 feet when crossing bars, and operating in shoal water. But on the other hand, I think it is a great mistake to inflict on general service sea-going sloops, the disabilities which a light draught of water carries with it in the open sea. I think therefore that the shifting of weights for exceptional service should be distinctly contemplated in the sloop class, and I should fix on fresh water, shell, and shot, as the weights most capable of being dealt with in this way. The transference of a single ton from 60 feet abaft the longitudinal centre of buoyancy to 60 feet before it, representing a moment of 120 foot-tons, would have considerable effect, and I suppose that in ships prepared for it, the weights represented by water, shot, and shell, would effect the object. Supposing the sloop to draw 8 feet forward, and 11 feet aft, on an even keel she would draw only 9 feet 6 inches; but even less than that, as the water would be started overboard. I should not, I think, willingly allow guns to form a part of this shifting weight, for the use of the guns must be contemplated in shoal water. But if the intended variation of draught could not be obtained in any other way, I should endeavour to move the after broadside guns to ports where they would be equally efficient forward. 56. I am only now concerned to describe with some more particularity a typical "sloop" such as I desire to see. Her draught of water and her coal supply are the great limiting conditions of the sloop; armament remaining at first somewhat in the background. Speed is mingled with coal supply, but I suppose the sloop ought to get 11 knots on the measured mile. The coal supply I have already fixed at 4,000 miles for five knots, and the shoal draft of water at not more than ten feet. The sloop's armament would be somewhat more composite than that of larger ships, for it has to be borne in mind. that while she may be met in the open sea by her fellow, and must therefore be armed principally in view of that contingency, she will also want something of longer range and of heavier shell for reaching into shoaler water than she can advance to, as well as for those land attacks which form the naval basis of our little wars. Hence her armament ought to contain one, or at most, two large guns, pivoting amidships, while she, like the corvette, frigate, and fleet-ship, wants a numerous light armament for the same purposes. I have, as in the case of the "Outrageous," taken a type from amongst our own ships, but it is not necessary to name her. She is about 600 tons, steams from 10 to 11 knots under favourable conditions at full speed, and can go about 2,000 miles in smooth water with her coal supply. She measures about 155 feet in length, and 25 feet in breadth, and draws when complete for sea, about 9 feet 6 inches, being a foot by the stern. Her armament consists of one 6-ton gun, one 64-pounder, and two 20-pounders, all mounted amidships as pivot-guns, the 20-pounders being at the bow and stern. The type is not unsuccessful, as these figures show, but her difficulties are that she is easily stopped in a sea-way, and cannot ensure making a full use of her normal steaming powers. Her spread of canvas (10,134 square feet of plain sail) of course assists her if she can use it, but she is naturally incapable of beating to windward, and her sail power costs her more than 20 tons of weight, that is, nearly one-third of her coal supply, and more than the weight of her guns. She is also short of boiler power, not perhaps for a short run, but she is short when speed is required for any continuance. Having but four guns in all, she is in a bad position to defend herself from those boat and torpedo attacks which her inshore position in time of war would call out, and lastly, she has, from my point of view, only half the coal that she ought to have. I prc pose to modify this type to meet all the requirements of my ideal ship, by adding to the size of this ship about 140 tons, making her displacement 732 tons; and I propose to do this by adding 15 feet to her length, and a proportionate beam and depth. This will give me space for four boilers similar to the three carried by my model; space also for 140 tons of coal, or double the quantity now carried, and a more roomy upper-deck for the armament. As to the draught of water, I propose to bring the "Bantam," as I name the new type, three feet by the stern; making 8 feet forward, and 11 feet aft. Then by stowing water (10 tons) and shot (say 5 tons) abaft, I should expect to get movable weights sufficient to bring the ship on an even keel, or 9 feet 6 inches mean draught for inshore operations; for the weights moved would not affect her fighting power, and hardly her steaming power in smooth water, while in the open sea her screws would be 1 foot 6 inches deeper than in the present type. As to weights, I should get about 15 tons by the modification of the rig, and about 75 tons by the additional buoyancy, after deducting weight of hull. This 90 tons will give me the boiler at 17 tons filled; and the coal 70 tons; leaving my weights for armament as at present in the type adverted to, or, with ammunition included, at 31 tons 11 cwt. in all. The armament I propose for this weight would be two 64-pounders at 14 tons 12 cwt. together, and six 20-pounders at 14 tons 2 cwt. in all, making 28 tons 14 cwt., and leaving three tons for Gatling, or mitrailleuse, to be mounted, one on the poop and one on the forecastle in a nest of hammocks, or a coil of hawsers in action. Those who lay stress on single heavy shells might wish to vary the armament by substituting a single 4-ton 7-inch gun for the two 64-pounders, but in my mind the other is preferable, and I should think that a "Bantam," armed as I propose, would have no difficulty in dealing with her older sister, armed as I have described. The exemplar would fire one 7-inch shell, one 64-pounder shell, and two 20-pound shells, as against the "Bantam's' two 64-pounder shells, three 20-pounder shells, and two Gatlings; but the exemplar would be in no condition to reply on her opposite broadside, whereas the "Bantam" would always have at least three 20-pounders to use, pending the transport of the others. But in repelling the attack of torpedo-boats, or boats attacking with intent to board, the "Bantam would be immeasurably the superior of her examplar, and the sloop should be armed with peculiar reference to attacks to which she is peculiarly liable. Plates IV and V give the outline of the "Bantam," on which it is unnecessary to do more than remark that though the sail power is apparently reduced from 10,134 square feet to 4,476 square feet, the reduction is not so great in reality, for circumstances render it unusual for my exemplar to set more than 7,812 square feet as “plain sail.” 57. I must advert for a moment to the gun-boat and other special classes, before quitting this description of my idcal navy. I do not think that the gun-boat should be looked on as a sca-going ship. Draught of water is the be-all and end-all of the gun-boat, and it should not exceed 6 feet. At such a draught, sea-going qualities, coal |