Indeed, so far has her Navy and that of this country outstripped those of the other nations of Europe that, perhaps, with the exception of Russia, there is now no country whose steam navy could, even if they were inclined to join in the strife, give any material assistance to either party. Russia, it is true, possesses somewhere about ten screw line-ofbattle ships and eleven frigates; which, if they are good ships, presents an imposing appearance; but from the fact that they are to a great extent manned by agricultural labourers, they can hardly come up to the French or English standard of excellence-so that in spite of their numbers we may dismiss them cavalierly. Whatever be their worth, however, the probabilities are that they would go to reinforce France in case of a quarrel; and so, by simply considering the navy of France, we shall get pretty nearly at the strength of possible combinations against us,-minus Russia and her ten liners. It would be a great error to imagine that a diminution in the number of our antagonists has at all altered the conditions of a possible struggle in favour of this country, and we are much mistaken if we cannot prove that, quality as well as numbers being taken into consideration, the present navy of France, singlehanded, promises to be quite as much of a match for England of the present day, as the united navies of the three powers were for England of the Revolutionary war. The mere fact that at the outbreak of that war the number of our line-of-battle ships was 148, and those of France only 77, while at the beginning of last year both nations possessed an equal number, is sufficient to show the probable accuracy of our estimate.

At the close of the war this disproportion between the two navies had considerably increased-England then possessing 218 ships of the line and 309 frigates, while France had only 69 ships of the line and 38 frigates. Until the time when sailing vessels ceased to be the force with which a naval contest was to be determined, though subject

of course to fluctuations, England never ceased to preserve a decided naval superiority over her neighbour. During the earlier of those years the proportions may be roughly stated as somewhere about three to one, while in the later ones it had dwindled down to two to one. Wonderful as have been the changes effected by the introduction of steam in all that relates to our manufactures and social economy, they certainly have not surpassed, if they can be fairly said to have equalled, those that it has occasioned in all that relates to the navy. Ten years ago, and for all practical purposes, not one of the ships which are now alone thought worth taking account of existed, while those which then were the pride of the country and the guardians of our shores are now, unless capable of conversion, looked upon as comparatively little better than lumber.

In 1818 our steam mercantile tonnage was 1,633 tons, but in 1859, 416,132. This called our Government's attention to the fact of the success of steam, and they took it up. The history of the steam navy since then may be given in a few lines. In 1811 they made an abortive attempt to build paddle corvettes. In 1840 they tried it again with some success (in the Vesuvius and Gorgon, which were at Acre); but, the Rattler, 800 tons, the first screw corvette, which was built the same year, seeming to possess none of the disadvantages of the paddle frigates (we all know what they are), others on her model were constructed, and the foundation of our present navy was laid, and the system of naval tactics altered. This we have heard too often already. Let us turn for a moment to another alteration in ship-fighting, more interesting because

And Sir W. Armstrong declares himself confident, that with one of his guns at the distance of 600 yards an object no larger than the muzzle of an enemy's gun may be struck at almost every shot, while at a distance of 3,000 yards a target of nine feet square, which at that distance looks a mere speck, has, on a calm day, been struck five times out of ten shots: a ship, therefore, which offers a much larger surface, would be hit at much greater distances, and towns might be shelled by ships five miles off. There is every reason to believe that so far the French have not been behind in the race, and that their artillery is at least equal to that of Sir W. Armstrong. The process, however, by which they manufacture it, and the results that have been obtained with it, have been so effectually kept secret, that it is difficult to speak with any accuracy on this very interesting subject. The best informed, however, affirm that these cannon are calculated, with the same charge of powder, to project a missile twice the weight of an ordinary ball thrice the distance, and that, unlike our own, it is not intended to fire solid shot from them, but shells, which explode on striking an object. These latter are said to be made with leaden bands round them. This, if true, favours the idea that the principle on which they are rifled is the same as that adopted by Sir W. Armstrong. Great as is the improvement which this ordnance shows when compared with that which it has supplanted, it seems destined that even it is to be distanced by a more formidable competitor. The experiments of Mr. Whitworth at Southport have shown

that he has produced a cannon which, while it exceeds Sir W. Armstrong's in range, promises to rival it in accuracy. The principles on which he has proceeded in his manufacture are original. The Armstrong barrel is made of rods of wrought iron, welded into a tube, the pitch of whose rifling is one turn in 10 feet, and the rifling itself 38 sharp grooves. Instead of the rolled bar-iron, of which Sir W. Armstrong's guns are made, Mr. Whitworth's gun is bored from a solid cylinder of homogeneous iron. The barrel is of hexagonal shape, making one complete turn, which varies as the diameter of the gun. This constitutes the only rifling, and it extends from one end of the barrel to the other. The projectile, which is of a longitudinal shape, tapering towards both ends, is cut at the middle so as to fit with accuracy the sides of the barrel. In the very important item of weight, the superiority in the larger kinds of ordnance still remains with Sir William. But we shall be much mistaken if Mr. Whitworth's scheme of reducing the diameter of the projectile, and consequently the bore-which enables the same relative strength of metal to be obtained in lighter guns-will not result in the production of heavy ordnances, whose weight, for their size, will be less than any that have yet been produced. In the lighter kinds, Mr. Whitworth even now can well bear comparison with his rival, as his 3-pounder, of which we have heard so much, can be easily manoeuvred and served with 2 horses and 2 men. This gun, at one elevation, in the course of 10 shots, showed a mean range of 1,579 yards, with a longitudinal deviation of 12 yards, and a lateral one of 52, whilst, at an elevation of 35 degrees, it showed on an average of 5 shots a mean range of 9,580 yards, with a longitudinal deviation of 81 yards, and a lateral one of 19.33. This superiority in point of range must in a great degree be attributed to the fact we have before noticed, that the chamber for the shot which exists in the Armstrong gun is dispensed with, thus enabling the rifling to extend from

one end of the barrel to the other. The advantages of this arrangement are not confined to range alone. The chamber in the Armstrong gun is an effectual limit to the length of the shot that can be used in it, while that of Whitworth can be used indifferently for shot of any length the distance to which it can be projected diminishing, of course, as the weight of the shot is increased; thus enabling an almost infinite variety of results to be obtained from the same gun. Whitworth's gun can be loaded from the muzzle, should anything go wrong; Armstrong's cannot be. In the forthcoming trial this ought to weigh considerably in the balance.

The enormous cost of building the new ships, combined with the fact that the fire to which they will be subjected from the new ordnance is likely to be of so much more destructive a nature, has suggested the possibility of making ships shot-proof. The idea first occurred to our ingenious neighbours across the water, and they accordingly set to work to build some frigates of enormous scantling, and plate them with metal-work of the thickness of 41 inches. Ships of this nature, if successful, promise such extraordinary advantages, that there was nothing left for this country but to follow the example of France and build some too. This has been accordingly done, and a series of experiments have been made for the purpose of ascertaining how far the metal casing has effected its object. No trial of the effect of Mr. Whitworth's ordnance was made till the latter part of last May, when its fire was directed against a new iron-cased floating battery. The result of some previous trials on the same vessel with Sir William Armstrong's gun and one of the smoothbore ordinary 68-pounders had been somewhat indecisive. At the distance of 200 yards the battery appears to have been impervious to the heaviest shot. When close to it a single shot from the 68-pounder indented the armourplate to a depth varying from one to two inches. Sir William Armstrong's gun was, as was to be expected, more

successful. Where two or more shots struck, the plating was considerably damaged; and it very nearly succeeded in forcing the conical-shaped shot fired from it through the plating; but, though very near, it never succeeded in quite penetrating the metal. The gun selected by Mr. Whitworth for his experiment was an 80-pounder. The distance at which it was placed was two hundred yards. The first shot was fired with a 121b. charge of powder. It struck on the edge of two plates, and, having gone clean through the metal work and eleven inches of the oak boarding, it glanced against an iron bolt, the effect of which was that it was driven upwards, burying itself between the plates and the inside of the ship. An increase of two pounds of powder was tried on firing the second shot. This time the shot struck the vessel in the centre of an armour-plate, and penetrated to the main-deck, leaving as clean a hole. through wood-work and metal-plating as a pistol-bullet would do if discharged against an ordinary pane of glass.

The

We have already observed that a great, and at present an unknown, revolution in all that relates to naval warfare has been effected by these means; but there is another change which has likewise taken place, and that by no means one slow in making itself felt. We refer to the enormous increase of expense occasioned by the introduction of these inventions. Our navy estimates have this year reached the almost alarming figure of 12,800,000l., being by a great deal the largest that this country has ever seen in time of peace. increase of expense incident on the employment of the new machinery presses upon us on every side. Not only is there the original cost of construction of the ship itself, double that of a sailing ship of the same rate, but the daily expenses show a proportionate increase. There is the item of coal, for instance, which in a first-rate ship of the line in commission cannot be estimated at much less than 1007. per diem. There are also the sums paid for the employment of the skilled labour of engineers and stokers;