THE HISTORY OF SHIPS AND SHIPPING INTERESTS (_continued_).
The Ironclad Question—One of the Topics of the Day—What is to be
their Value in Warfare?—Story of the Dummy Ironclad—Two Real
Ironclads vanquished by it—Experience on board an American
Monitor—Visit of the _Miantonoma_ to St. John’s—Her Tour round the
World—Her Turrets and Interior Arrangements—Firing off the Big
Guns—Inside the Turret—“Prepare!”—Effects of the Firing—A
Boatswain’s-mate’s Opinion—The _Monitor_ goes round the World
safely—Few of the Original American Ironclads left—English
Ironclads—The _Warrior_—Various
Types—Iron-built—Wood-built—Wood-covered—The Greatest Result yet
attained, the _Inflexible_—Circular Ironclads—The “_Garde
Côtes_”—Cost of Ironclads—The Torpedo Question—The Marquis of
Worcester’s Inventions—Bishop Wilkins’ Subaqueous Ark—Fulton’s
Experiments—A Frightened Audience—A Hulk Blown Up—Government Aid
to Fulton—The _Argus_ and her “Crinoline”—Torpedoes successfully
foiled—Their use during the American War—Brave Lieut. Cushing—The
_Albemarle_ Destroyed—Modern Torpedoes: the “Lay;” the
“Whitehead”—Probable Manner of using in an Engagement—The Ram and
its Power.
Early in these chapters, allusion was made to one of the most important of
all vital topics connected with shipping interests—the ironclad
question—and as it concerns the well-being of the Royal Navy, it concerns
that of the nation itself, and no excuse can be needed for its discussion
here. Day by day we hear of new types of armoured vessels, single
specimens costing the price of a small fleet of former days. That, under
certain conditions, they must prove very formidable, there can be no
doubt. But, it must be asked, are the bulk of them seaworthy ships? How
far is torpedo warfare to interfere with their employment? Are they worth
their price to the nation?
Their history so far has been one as much, and indeed far more, of failure
than success. “Our submarine fleet” has become a byword, while none of
their exploits have excelled those of the _Merrimac_ and _Monitor_, two of
the very earliest examples constructed. Indeed, the writer knows no more
successful results attained than by an improvised “dummy” ironclad during
the American war. The ridiculous often merges into or mingles with the
important and the sublime, and the story, little known in England, is
inserted here to show how much may sometimes be done in warfare with
insignificant means.
[Illustration: PEACE AND WAR.]
The incident occurred in February, 1863. An old coal barge(42) adrift had
been picked up in the James River, and the brilliant idea seized some of
Admiral Porter’s men to convert her into a “monitor.” The whole scheme was
carried out in twelve hours. In fact, her construction was hardly more
solid than the “paper forts” built of canvas and boards by the Chinese
during our war with them, and which collapsed after a shot or two as
readily as would the “Rock of Gibraltar” or “Mount Vesuvius” at a firework
display. The barge was built up high with boards, while funnels and
turrets constructed of pork-barrels reared above, and two old canoes did
duty for quarter-boats. A small house, taken from the back yard of a
planter’s dwelling, stood for the pilot-house. Her furnaces were built of
mud or clay; they were only intended to make smoke, not steam. Then a good
coat of black paint or pitch; her furnaces were filled with pitch and
other inflammable materials, and she was ready. As soon as the “dummy”
turned adrift on the Mississippi came in range of the Vicksburg batteries,
the alarmed garrison opened fire upon it. The black monitor glided down
the stream, belching out fire and smoke, but gave not a shot in return.
With amazement the Vicksburg soldiers found that they could not make the
slightest impression on the turreted monster. They did not know that it
was full of water, and had not a man on board! In ominous and silent
disdain she seemed to be making for the Confederate ironclads; one of
them, the _Queen of the West_, leaving part of her crew ashore,
incontinently fled, with all her steam power, making the best of her way
to the Red River. The _Indianola_, a vessel previously captured from the
Northerners, was lying aground, and not to be taken by this ruthless
monster of a monitor, was ordered to be blown up, which was accordingly
done. Thus was this bloodless victory gained by the dummy ironclad. It is
not impossible that we may hear of similar tricks in future warfare, as
all is fair therein.
The following experiences on board an American monitor are kindly sent to
the writer by a friend, formerly in the Royal Navy.
“Great, indeed, was the excitement caused by the deeds of the _Monitor_
and _Merrimac_ amongst the officers and men of Her Majesty’s North
Atlantic Squadron. Whether dancing in Halifax, chasing French fishermen on
the Newfoundland coast, or ‘sunning’(43) in St. George, there was always
to be found some one, from captain to loblolly boy, with a new story of
the prowess of these formidable monsters of the _shallows_! I write
‘shallows’ advisedly, for if the experience which I am about to narrate
proves anything, it will be that as a ‘deep water’ or sea-going craft the
_Monitor_ is practically useless.
“Notwithstanding a certain eagerness to behold a specimen of their
floating batteries, curiosity was not destined to be gratified until
nearly two years after the close of the American War, when the United
States Government determined on sending a representative—the
_Miantonoma_—to make a tour of the world. The object of this resolution
was to prove that the American invention was not a mere floating battery,
but was destined to revolutionise the system of armour-plated ships. The
_Miantonoma_ was accompanied when she made her appearance in the harbour
of St. John’s, Newfoundland, by two tenders, one a second-class corvette,
the other a captured blockade-runner, which had been mounted with a single
‘Parrot’ pivot gun, throwing a spherical shot of 180 lbs. This projectile
was dubbed ‘the Devil’ by those on board, who were by no means anxious to
hear its voice, for the lightly-built blockade-runner trembled in every
knee at each discharge. Nevertheless, such a vessel properly built is
destined to play an important part in the navy of the future, when our
present unwieldy ironclads shall have been relegated to that bourne where
torpedoes cannot terrify.
[Illustration: THE “MIANTONOMA.”]
“The _Miantonoma_ was a twin-turreted monitor, carrying two of Parrot’s
480 pounder smooth-bore. Her spar-deck, which was flush fore and aft, was
about two and a half to three feet above the surface of the water in
harbour. What we would call the gun-deck was below the water-line some
eight feet, and here at sea during any sort of rough weather, the men were
compelled to live. Air was supplied (faugh! what an atmosphere it was,
even in harbour!) by means of pipes which ran up to a scaffolding—I can
find no better name for the structure—elevated above the spar-deck fifteen
feet. Here were the wheel-house and a place for the look-out. But as it
was apprehended that the first respectable gale would take charge of the
flimsy structure and sweep it all away, a ‘preventer’ steering apparatus
worked below, and knowledge was gained of what was going on in the upper
world by means of reflectors. Two things struck the eye of an observant
stranger on gaining the side. The first was the formidable appearance of
the turrets—the latter, _mirabile dictu_, the number of spittoons! At once
it became evident that such a craft as that which, if you please, we are
now aboard of, could never be taken by boarding. Given the flush deck
filled with an armed host; one of these terrible turrets would slowly turn
round, the shield protecting the embrasure would fly back, a gaping
volcano would belch forth, a whirlwind of flame and smoke only—no need,
indeed, would there be for iron orbs at such quarters—and, ere its shield
had once more covered grinning death, the armed host would have been swept
away.
[Illustration: INTERIOR OF A TURRET SHIP.]
“It is Her Majesty’s birthday, and the _Miantonoma_ steams away with those
who have been invited on board to witness the firing of the big guns. The
salute cannot be fired in the little harbour, else surely every pane of
glass from the block-house to Riverhead will pay the penalty. So
Freshwater Bay is to have the honour of hearing man’s thunder
reverberating along its hill-girded shores.
“Bang, bang—pop, pop, bang. You hear the Armstrongs and old field-pieces
go off from Her Majesty’s men-of-war in harbour, and Her Majesty’s Fort
William and water batteries. Then you descend to utter silence. You ascend
again through a trapdoor, and find yourself in a circular room, some
twelve feet in diameter, padded from top to bottom like the interior of a
carriage. By your side is a huge mass of iron. You are inside the turret.
A glimmering lamp sheds its feeble light on the moving forms around you,
and from below comes the faint whispering of the men, until the trap is
shut and you are again in utter silence.
“‘_Prepare!_’ The gunner’s mates stand you on your toes, and tell you to
lean forward and thrust your tongue out of your mouth. You hear the
creaking of machinery. It is a moment of intense suspense. Gradually a
glimmer of light—an inch—a flood. The shield passes from the opening—the
gun runs out. A flash, a roar—a mad reeling of the senses, and crimson
clouds flitting before your eyes—a horrible pain in your ears, a sense of
oppression on your chest, and the knowledge that you are not on your
feet—a whispering of voices blending with the concert in your ears—a
darkness before your eyes—and you find yourself plump up in a heap against
the padding, whither you have been thrown by the violence of the
concussion. Before you have recovered sufficiently to note the effects I
have endeavoured to describe, the shield is again in its place and the gun
ready for re-loading. They tell you that the best part of the sound has
escaped through the port-hole, otherwise there would be no standing it,
and our gunner’s mate whispers in your ear: ‘It’s all werry well, but they
busts out bleeding from the chest and ears after the fourth discharge, and
has to be taken below.’ You have had enough of it too, and are glad that
they don’t ask you to witness another shot fired.
“Since the _Miantonoma’s_ time vast improvements have been made in the
matter of turret firing. The guns are now discharged by means of an
electric spark, which obviates the necessity for having anyone in the
turret, and is certainly a great blessing.
“‘And what do you think of her?’ I asked a boatswain’s-mate. ‘Think of
her, sir!’ he replied. ‘I think, sir, that she’s a floating coffin, and I
would as soon live in ——. Every time we’re out of harbour she goes under
water, and don’t come up till we get in again, as the saying is. We are
just cooped up here waiting for a big wave to come and swallow us, for she
don’t rise to the waves, she goes through ’em.’ Then, becoming more
confidential, ‘Tower of the world be hanged, sir! None of us believe we’ll
ever see Queenstown, and if we only had a chance to get ashore, there
ain’t a man but what would desert, I guess.’
“I must draw the reader’s attention to the fact that I give this sailor’s
statement for what it is worth. The officers, one and all, as far as my
memory serves me, stated that she was a very good sea boat; better,
indeed, than they expected, though somewhat sluggish in the water. I may
add that the _Miantonoma_ not only reached Queenstown, but _did_ succeed
in making a tour of the world. Yet it was alleged that her crew, with the
exception of some twenty men, were put into the tenders, and that she was
towed across the ‘herring pond’ and round the Horn by them. From these
facts and rumours the reader may form his own opinion as to the
seaworthiness of the American monitor. My belief is, that for a sea-fight,
especially should one occur in a gale of wind, they are practically as
useless as a hay-barge, while for harbour defences they have proved
themselves invaluable. Of all the splendid fleet of monitors possessed by
America at the close of the Federal and Confederate war, there are scarce
any left to keep up the reputation of the United States as a naval power.
They were contract built, of green oak. The Philadelphia and San Francisco
navy yards afford ample proof that a decade has sufficed to destroy what
shot and shell found almost invulnerable. Such splendid specimens of naval
architecture as the _Brooklyn_ and _Ohio_ alone are left to keep up the
appearance of America’s naval strength on foreign stations. But let us
hope that her ‘shoddy’ monitors, like her shoddy blankets or wooden
nutmegs, have passed away with her convalescence from intestine wounds,
and that the next decade may witness the Stars and Stripes floating
powerfully and peacefully side by side with the Union Jack, omnipotent for
good.”
Any such expression of feeling in regard to the safety of English
ironclads, in spite of the terrible loss of the _Captain_, and that of the
_Vanguard_ (only less serious inasmuch as no lives were sacrificed), would
not be echoed by any British sailor on board them. The accommodations,
barring the general darkness and sense of gloom inside, only partially
illumined by the fitful light of lamps, are generally good, and it is by
no means certain that when the electric light has attained that perfection
at which its promoters are aiming, there can be any complaint on that
score at all. Still, until some grand success has been attained by
ironclads, it is very questionable whether they can be thoroughly popular,
except to courageous, scientific, and ambitious officers, of whom the
service, the writer is certain, does not stand in need. We have had a “Man
of iron” ashore, and we shall have him afloat when the occasion requires.
The first types of ironclads introduced into the Royal Navy, as for
example, the _Warrior_ and _Black Prince_, were nearly identical in
general appearance to the war-ships of the day. Now _all_ British
ironclads are built with sides approaching the upright or vertical above
water. At first they only attempted broadside fire; now bow and stern guns
are common. The _Warrior_, as the earliest example of an ironclad in the
Royal Navy, deserves special mention. She is doing duty to-day, and is by
no means an effete example, but an excellent and useful vessel. She is
armoured at the middle only, in the most exposed parts. In other words,
her engines and leading guns are protected, while the rest of her hull,
though strong, is not armour-covered. _Now_, whatever weight of armour
this central, or “box-battery,” as it has been termed, may have, there is
always a continuous belt of iron extending from stem to stern, and
protecting the region of the water-line and steering gear, the counter of
the ship being carried below the water in order to screen the rudder-head.
This improvement is due to Sir Spencer Robinson. The _Warrior’s_ armour
was uniform in thickness; now it is strongest in the vital parts. The
_Warrior_ had only a main-deck battery armour plated; recent ships have
had a protected upper-deck battery given them. The _Warrior_ carried a
large number of guns in an outspread battery; all later ships, of whatever
type, have had a _concentrated_ battery of much heavier guns. This early
armoured ship is long; nearly all later examples are much shorter in
proportion to their breadth.
And now to the armour itself, which is sometimes affixed to an iron and
sometimes to a wooden hull, and in a few cases has wood _outside_ it.
These facts, by no means generally known, must be studied, for it can
hardly yet be said to be determined which is the better form. It may be
said, in general terms, that the “adoption of armour-plating was
accompanied in this country by the introduction of iron for the
construction of the hulls of ships of war, and our ironclad fleet is for
the most part _iron-built_. We have, it is true, a number of wood-built
ironclads, but most of these are converted vessels.”(44) Several were
built of wood (and then armoured) for the purpose of utilising the large
stocks of timber accumulated in the dockyards. In the future it is
probable that nearly all will be of iron, with wood backing. The armour of
the _Warrior_ is only 4½ inches thick, with, however, a “backing” of 18
inches of timber. This type includes the _Black Prince_, _Achilles_,
_Defence_, _Hector_, _Valiant_, and _Prince Albert_. Then we come to
another series, of which the _Bellerophon_, _Penelope_, _Invincible_,
_Audacious_, _Swiftsure_, _Triumph_, _Iron Duke_, and unfortunate
_Vanguard_ furnish examples. They average 6 inches of iron-plating to 10
inches of wood backing. The lost _Captain_ was somewhat heavier in both
plating and backing. Then again we advance to a still heavier type—12
inches of iron to 18 inches of wood: the _Glatton_, _Thunderer_, and
_Devastation_ furnish examples. Then there is the _wood-built_ class, the
thickness of their (wooden) sides ranging from 19½ to as high as 36
inches, with 4½ to 6 inches of armour. The _Royal Sovereign_ (a turret
ship) is a leading example of this class; she has 5½ inches of armour,
covering 36 inches of wood.
To speak of all the types of armour-clad ships would most undoubtedly
weary the reader. Let us examine a leading example. The _Inflexible_
(double turret ship) is probably the greatest result yet attained. She is
an ironclad of 11,400 tons, with 8,000 horse-power, her estimated first
cost being considerably over half a million sterling. She is 320 feet
long, and has armour of 16 to 24 inches thick, with a backing of 17 to 25
inches of wood. She has no less than 135 compartments, while her engines
are so completely isolated that if one breaks down the other would be
working. “But already, as if to show the impossibility of attaining the
stage of finality as regards the construction of our men-of-war, there is
every reason to believe that she has been excelled.... Designed,” says our
leading journal,(45) “as an improvement upon the Russian _Peter the
Great_, she will herself be surpassed by the two Italian frigates which
are building at La Spezzia and Castellamare.... While the _Inflexible’s_
turrets are formed of a single thickness of 18-inch armour, and her
armament consists of four 81-ton guns, the turrets of the _Dandolo_ and
the _Duilio_ are built of plates 22 inches thick, and are armed with four
100-ton guns.” The writer then enlarges on recent gunnery experiments,
showing that even the enormous thickness of the _Inflexible’s_ iron sides
have been pierced, and concludes by saying that, “so far as the exigencies
of the navy are concerned, the limit of weight seems to have already been
reached, for the simple reason that the buoyancy of our ironclads cannot
with safety be further diminished by the burden of heavier armour and
armaments.” The leading feature in this vessel is the situation of the
turrets. In most turret ships afloat these batteries are placed on the
middle line, and in consequence only one-half the guns can be brought to
bear on an enemy either right ahead or directly astern. In the
_Inflexible_ the turrets rise up on either side of the ship _en échelon_
within the citadel walls, the fore turret being on the port side and the
after turret on the starboard side. By these means the whole of the four
guns can be discharged _simultaneously_ at a ship right ahead or right
astern, or, in pairs, towards any point. What vessel could withstand such
a fire rightly directed?
[Illustration: THE “INFLEXIBLE.”]
As we have seen, the forms and proportions of ironclads have undergone
enormous changes from the days when the success of the plated floating
batteries at Kinburn called the special attention of Europe to the
possibility of successfully protecting vessels in the same way. The shot
of the enemy had no effect on these batteries. A special correspondent of
the _Times_ said: “The balls hopped back off their sides without leaving
an impression, save such as a pistol-ball makes on the target of a
shooting gallery. The shot could be heard distinctly striking the sides of
the battery with a ‘sharp smack,’ and then could be seen flying back,
splashing the water at various angles according to the direction in which
they came, till they dropped exhausted.”
One of the greatest novelties is the _circular_ ironclad, proposed long
ago by Mr. John Elder, in a paper read before the United Service
Institution, and carried out by Admiral Popoff, of the Russian navy, who
designed one which was afterwards constructed and was christened the
_Novgorod_. She was 100 feet in diameter, with curved deck, the highest
point of which was only five or six feet above the water. She carried two
28-ton guns. Its model might be described as a floating saucer with a
comparatively flat covering. It is even asserted that a good speed is
attainable with such vessels, and that they are steerable, if hydraulic
machinery is employed. Mr. Elder’s plan was as follows:—When a revolving
pilot-house on the vessel turned, a jet of water was ejected in a backward
line to the very course proposed to steer. The pilot or steersman—having a
complete control of the movements of the pilot-house, and a clear look out
a-head—only arranged to steer in a particular direction, and the water jet
propelled the vessel to its destination. Such vessels are fit for nothing
better than river or harbour protection.
The _Alexandra_, whose batteries we show on the opposite page, is one of
the most efficient of our English armour-plated ships. She was built at
Chatham, and launched in 1875. She was specially built for speed, and
carries the maximum weight of armour consistent with sea-going qualities.
She is armed with three guns of twenty-five tons each and nine of eighteen
tons.
[Illustration: SECTION OF THE “ALEXANDRA.”]
A new form of ironclad, destined for coast duty, has also been introduced
in Holland and France. These Governments consider that for the defence of
a coast-line, fixed land batteries are not sufficient. They have,
therefore, adopted a ponderous form of turreted ironclad, which the French
term _garde-côtes_. They are not supposed to be adapted for long sea
voyages, as they are veritable floating iron castles, carrying not merely
heavy guns, but whole batteries of smaller guns. They have good engine
power, and can, therefore, be moved to any part of the coast with ease.
The cost of ironclads to this country has been very serious. Mr. Reed puts
it down at a million sterling a year since their inauguration.(46) For the
eighteen years preceding 1876, they cost £16,738,935, and with the cost of
wear and tear, repair, and maintenance, not less than £18,000,000.
£300,000 was required for repairs and maintenance alone in one year,
perhaps an exceptional case. The _Warrior_, built in the year 1860, cost,
to 1876, for maintenance and repair, no less than £124,245, or about a
third of her original cost. She is the earliest type of ironclad, and of
small tonnage compared with several of her successors. What _they_ may
cost to maintain is a still more serious problem. Single ironclads have
cost the country half a million sterling; the _Inflexible_, £600,000.
[Illustration: PREPARING FOR TORPEDO EXPERIMENTS AT PORTSMOUTH.]
Connected intimately with the ironclad question is the torpedo movement.
From an early date schemes have been devised for injuring an enemy’s
vessel by submarine apparatus and otherwise than by guns. In the
seventeenth century, we find the celebrated Marquis of Worcester
describing such apparatus. The ninth of his “Century of Inventions”
describes a small engine, portable in one’s pocket, which might be carried
and fastened on the inside of the ship, and at any appointed time, days or
weeks after, at the will of the operator, it should explode and sink that
vessel.
In his tenth invention, the Marquis of Worcester describes “a way from a
mile off to dive and fasten a like engine to any ship, so as it may
punctually work the same effect, either for time or execution.” The
details of construction and working are left to the reader’s imagination.
Bishop Wilkins, in a curious work on “Mathematical Magick,” published in
1648, describes a possible submarine vessel, or “ark,” as he terms it. He
says that it “may be effected beyond all question, because one Cornelius
Dreble hath already experimented on it here in England.” Of Dreble very
little is known; but it is on record that he constructed a subaqueous
boat, which he exhibited before James I., which carried twelve rowers and
some passengers, and further, that that monarch was so pleased with it
that he sent a duplicate as a present to the grand Duke of Muscovy
(Russia). The bishop discusses the matter very fully. The boat is, of
course, to be watertight, all openings being sealed for the nonce by
leather bags, with two sets of fastenings. The oars were to project also
through leather bags, giving freedom of motion and yet excluding the
water. A serious difficulty—the lack of fresh air on board—is partially
slurred over; but he considers that the sailors, “by long use and
custome,” will practically get used to it. The raising or lowering of the
vessel is to be accomplished by the lifting or depression of an enormous
stone hung to its keel. He considered that the steering would be easier
than on the surface, there being no contrary winds or atmospheric
disturbances to interfere. The vessel is to be well manned by artisans,
and children are to be born in the “ark:” one of the points specially
mentioned being their inevitable astonishment when they for the first time
behold the light of day at the surface, and are landed on _terra firma_!
The log is not merely to be written but is to be printed on board. “Among
the many conveniences of such a contrivance, it may be of very great
advantage against a navy of enemies, who, by this means, may be undermined
in the water and blown up.”
Another old writer, Schott, in a rare and curious work, entitled
“Mirabilia Mechanica,” offers several schemes for submarine vessels, and
gives a drawing of one with a paddle-wheel as the propelling power. The
wheel, worked by men, was to work in a watertight box in the centre of the
vessel, the paddles projecting below the keel. A Frenchman built a vessel
of this description at Rotterdam in 1653, and publicly exhibited it.
Pepys, in his “Diary,” writes, on the 14th of March, 1662: “This afternoon
came the German Dr. Knuffler, to discourse with us about his engine to
blow up ships. We doubted not the matter of fact—it being tried in
Cromwell’s time—but the safety of carrying them in ships; but he do tell
us that when he comes to tell the King his secret (for none but kings
successively, and their heirs, must know it) it will appear of no danger
at all.” We have before described Fulton’s submarine boat, the _Nautilus_,
and his torpedo experiments in France and England; let us now follow him
to the New World.
Fulton arrived in America in December, 1806, and so far from being
discouraged by the apathy displayed towards his inventions in Europe,
inaugurated fresh experiments, under Government sanction, a certain
expenditure being authorised. An amusing account of one of his semi-public
exhibitions is given by his biographer:(47)—“In the meantime, anxious to
prepossess his countrymen with a good opinion of his project, he invited
the magistracy of New York and a number of citizens to Governor’s Island,
where were the torpedoes and the machinery with which his experiments were
to be made; these, with the manner in which they were to be used and were
expected to operate, he explained very fully. While he was lecturing on
his blank torpedoes, which were large empty copper cylinders, his numerous
auditors crowded round him. At length he turned to a copper case of the
same description, which was placed under the gateway of the fort, and to
which was attached a clockwork lock. This, by drawing out a peg, he set in
motion, and then said to his attentive audience, ‘Gentlemen, this is a
charged torpedo, with which, precisely in its present state, I mean to
blow up a vessel; it contains one hundred and seventy pounds of gunpowder,
and if I were to suffer the clockwork to run fifteen minutes, I have no
doubt but that it would blow this fortification to atoms!’ The circle
round Mr. Fulton was very soon much enlarged, and before five of the
fifteen minutes were out there were but two or three persons remaining
under the gateway; some, indeed, lost no time in getting at the greatest
possible distance from the torpedo with their best speed, and did not
again appear on the ground till they were assured it was lodged in the
magazine.” Fulton, of course, displayed the utmost coolness, knowing that
his torpedo could not explode till the clockwork had run its allotted
time, and of course taking care that it should be stopped long before the
expiration of the fifteen minutes.
On the 20th of July, 1807, he attempted to blow up with torpedoes, in the
harbour of New York, a large hulk brig which had been provided for the
purpose. Several unsuccessful attempts were made at first, owing to some
derangements connected with the locks of the exploding apparatus. At
length, however, the explosion took place, and was a thorough success. He
has left a full account of it in his own work.(48) Nothing was left of the
brig; all that was seen in her place was a high column of water, smoke,
and fragments. It showed, as Fulton always believed, that the torpedo
should, if possible, be exploded _under_ the vessel to be blown up. In his
cool but yet enthusiastic way he says: “Should a ship of the line
containing five hundred men contend with ten good row-boats, each with a
torpedo and ten men, she would risk total annihilation, while the boats,
under the cover of the night and quick movements, would risk only a few
men out of one hundred.”
Fulton, after this, lectured frequently before the members of Congress,
and so favourably impressed them that a sum of 5,000 dollars was voted in
aid of his experiments. One of the plans he proposed was to couple by a
line two torpedoes, then letting them drift on the bow of the vessel to be
destroyed, the line would catch on the cable or bows, and the torpedoes
would drift towards the vessel on either side. He also proposed “block
ships” of 50 or 100 tons, with cannon-proof sides and musket-proof decks
(_i.e._, virtually ironclads), to be propelled by machinery, _which was to
be worked by the crew_. “On each quarter and bow she was to be armed with
a torpedo fastened to a long spar, the interior end of which was to be
supported and braced by ropes from the yards.... By means of these spars
the torpedoes were to be thrust under the bottom of the vessel to be
destroyed.” Half the many plans proposed for torpedo warfare may be traced
back to Robert Fulton at the end of the last and beginning of the present
century. Among his inventions was a “cable-cutting machine,” a description
of which would occupy an undue amount of space in a popular work. Suffice
it to say that by its means he succeeded in cutting, several feet below
the surface of the water, the cable—a 14-inch one—of a vessel lying at
anchor.
One of the most important experiments made at this time was his attempt,
under sanction of Government, to blow up the sloop-of-war _Argus_, and the
case demonstrates very clearly the ingenuity of the _defence_, and the
means taken to foil the assailing torpedo. We have heard quite recently of
propositions to defend a vessel by means of a kind of “crinoline,” as it
has been termed, a strong network, &c., surrounding the whole or a part of
the vessel at some distance from it, which should prevent the torpedo from
exploding near the hull. Such was actually the means devised by Commodore
Rodgers, of the United States Navy, in the year 1809, and which proved
entirely successful in foiling Fulton’s torpedo. Colden says:—“She had a
strong netting suspended from her spritsail-yard, which was anchored at
the bottom; she was surrounded by spars lashed together, which floated on
the surface of the water, so as to place her completely in a pen; she had
grappling-irons and heavy pieces of the same metal suspended from her
yards and rigging, ready to be plunged in any boat that came beneath them;
she had great swords, or scythes, fastened to the ends of long spars,
moving like sweeps, which unquestionably would have mowed off as many
heads as came within their reach.”
[Illustration: THE OLD STYLE AND THE NEW (A THREE-DECKER AND A TORPEDO
BOAT).]
By these devices the torpedo-boat was unable to get near the _Argus_,
while the netting, anchored to the bottom of the harbour, prevented any
probability of the torpedo being fired under the vessel. The Government
had practically said to Fulton, “Do your best, and we’ll do our best to
defeat you.” The experiment was not one-sided, as are so many. Fulton, far
from complaining, thus wrote: “I will do justice to the talents of
Commodore Rodgers. The nets, booms, kentledge, and grapnels which he
arranged around the _Argus_ made a formidable appearance against one
torpedo-boat and eight bad oarsmen. I was taken unawares. I had explained
to the officers of the navy my means of attack; they did not inform me of
their means of defence. The nets were put down to the ground, otherwise I
should have sent the torpedoes under them. In this situation, the means
with which I was provided being imperfect, insignificant, and inadequate
to the effect to be produced, I might be compared to what the inventor of
gunpowder would have appeared had he lived in the time of Julius Cæsar,
and presented himself before the gates of Rome with a four-pounder, and
had endeavoured to convince the Roman people that by means of such
machines he could batter down their walls. They would have told him that a
few catapultas casting arrows and stones upon his men would cause them to
retreat; that a shower of rain would destroy his ill-guarded powder; and
the Roman centurions, who would have been unable to conceive the various
modes in which gunpowder has since been used to destroy the then art of
war, would very naturally conclude that it was a useless invention; while
the manufacturers of catapultas, bows, arrows, and shields would be the
most vehement against further experiments.”
[Illustration: LIEUT. CUSHING’S ATTACK ON THE “ALBEMARLE.”]
Torpedoes were used extensively during the civil war in America, but
almost entirely for rivers or harbour defence. One of the most prominent
examples was the following:—The ironclad ram _Albemarle_(49) had been
carrying all before it, till Lieutenant Cushing, a brave young officer,
scarcely twenty-one years of age, took a steam-launch, equipped as a
torpedo-boat, on the night of October, 1864, up the Roanoake River. He had
with him thirteen men. The launch was steered directly for the ironclad,
which lay at one of the wharfs of Plymouth, protected by a raft of logs
extending thirty feet. The enemy’s fire was at once very severe, but the
torpedo-boat went bravely on, and succeeded in pressing in the logs a few
feet. Cushing, in his despatch, says—“The torpedo was exploded at the same
time that the _Albemarle’s_ gun was fired. A shot seemed to go crashing
through my boat, and a dense mass of water rushed in from the torpedo,
filling and completely disabling her. The enemy then continued to fire at
fifteen feet range, and demanded our surrender, which I twice refused.”
Cushing leaped into the water and, with one of his party, made good his
escape. The rest of the little crew were either captured, killed, or
wounded. The object of the attack was, however, successful, and the
_Albemarle_ was found to be a complete wreck. Torpedoes were also employed
with great effect by the Paraguayans in their war against the Brazilians
in 1866.
[Illustration: PARAGUAYAN TORPEDO BLOWING UP A BRAZILIAN IRONCLAD.]
Great are the varieties of torpedoes invented at various times in late
years, and a technical description of them, which would be wearying to the
reader, would fill a large volume. An ingenious kind, known as the “Lay”
torpedo, after the name of its inventor, comes from the New World. It is
of cylindrical form, with conical ends, the forward cone calculated to
hold a hundred pounds of some explosive substance—dynamite,(50) probably,
being used. A forward section of the main cylinder holds a powerful gas,
condensed into _liquid_ form, and used as the motive power, and connected
with the machinery by a valve operated by electricity. The torpedo has a
cable coiled as harpoon-ropes are arranged in whaling-vessels, which may
be of any length, the wires connected with the battery following its
course. This instrument of destruction is entirely under the control of
the operator, who may be stationed with his small portable battery on the
shore or on a vessel. It is said that they have been sent out half a mile
and brought back to the starting-point at a rate of twelve miles an hour,
and that the rapidity and precision with which the machine obeyed the
operator demonstrated them to be among the most formidable weapons ever
invented for naval warfare.
[Illustration: _Porter Torpedo Boat. Fulton’s Torpedo Boat._
_ Spar Torpedo. (Front and Side Views.) Lay Torpedo._
DIFFERENT FORMS OF TORPEDOES.]
These subaqueous weapons have never been used in an engagement between
fleets. In an interesting essay(51) on the subject by Commander Noel,
R.N., he recommends or proposes that four torpedo vessels should accompany
a fleet, and describes their probable operations as follows:—
[Illustration: TORPEDO EXPERIMENTS AT PORTSMOUTH, WITH THE ELECTRIC
LIGHT.]
“Let us imagine ourselves, then, on board a rakish little craft, fitted
for Harvey torpedo work; we can steam sixteen knots; we tow a torpedo on
each quarter; and we are so admirably fitted with steel-protecting
mantelets that neither officer nor man is exposed either to view or to
rifle fire. Our instructions are that on the approach of a hostile force
we and our three consorts are to hold ourselves in readiness to charge the
enemy’s line, passing through at full speed, and doing all the damage that
lies in our power: these orders to be carried into effect in obedience to
a preconcerted signal. The enemy is observed approaching, and apparently
moving at about ten knots’ speed. The torpedo vessels are let loose, and,
choosing the centre of the enemy’s fleet, rush on, steering for a
flag-ship leading a column in line ahead. Heavy guns are fired at us as we
near, but we are so small and rapid in our movements that no shot takes
effect; we are reducing our distance at the rate of a mile in two and a
half minutes; soon comes the time of suspense; in a second or two we are
passing the flag-ship; the port torpedo is dipped—will it strike her?
Suddenly a tug on the wire towing-rope, and it parts. Her bow has been
protected, and our torpedo is torn away harmless. However, another mine
tows on the opposite quarter, still in working order; we are in the midst
of the enemy’s fleet, rushing past one after another at half-minute
intervals; our only chance of using our other torpedo is in breaking
through the line; our commander is eminent for his skill, courage, and
confidence. Little choice is given us, but he observes a rather great
interval astern of the fourth ship. ‘Starboard’ is the order, and we break
through under her stern; our starboard torpedo is at the same time dipped,
and passes under the fifth ship. Owing to a combination of luck and good
management, the torpedo takes effect and the enemy is blown up. The other
torpedo vessels have thrown the enemy into considerable disorder, but none
have succeeded in using their torpedoes with effect. One of them has been
struck by a heavy shell and totally disabled, but the whole fleet has
passed on without finding it possible to capture or sink her without
losing their position in station and being left behind; the thought
foremost in every captain’s mind also being that the enemy’s fleet is
almost in contact with them, and that the moment to act has arrived.
“This is an example of an attack with ‘Harvey’ torpedoes from ahead and
across the bow.... In my opinion, it would invariably be rendered
fruitless if the bows of the ships attacked were protected by an iron
framework of the simplest description.
“But let us return to our little craft, in which we have already run the
gauntlet of the hostile fleet. Having cleared the enemy with little or no
damage, we look back and see our fleet of ironclads breaking through their
lines, which have been so shaken by our assault. When through, our fleet
re-forms and wheels for the next charge. We must be at work again; our
torpedoes are replaced, and everything is in working order. This time we
follow our ironclads to the charge. We are, if anything, more hopeful of
success. The enemy will not see us till we are at them; our blood is
warming to the work, and we feel that we have gained experience and
confidence by the first charge. Pressing on, we observe the second charge
of the fleet, amidst smoke, confusion, and thundering of cannon. The enemy
is prepared, and it is a case of ‘Greek meeting Greek.’ Our vessel is put
at full speed, and, with our consorts (now reduced to two), we go at the
enemy. However, in the charge that is made only one of us succeeds in
exploding a torpedo, and that without much damage to the enemy; one of our
consorts is run down and sunk, and we pass through, only dipping one
torpedo, and that too late to take effect. The enemy are not in the steady
line they were in before, and consequently we have not such an opportunity
of creating disorder, and have more difficulty in manœuvring to use our
weapon. Passing on, fortune still favours us. We come across an enemy
disabled, stern on to us with her ensign flying. ‘At her!’ is the order.
Another moment and we are close to her, our torpedo in beautiful position,
and the enemy helpless. Down comes her ensign, just in time; we are able
to let go the torpedo so as to clear her—now a lawful prize.
“So it is that I believe a torpedo vessel will be handled in an action. It
will be ticklish work; and all I can say is that the men who undertake it
should be gifted with coolness and courage above their fellows, as well as
with the utmost proficiency in handling their vessels.”
Perhaps the most formidable _ocean-going_ torpedo vessel yet constructed
is the American despatch-vessel _Alarm_, designed by Admiral David Porter,
of the United States Navy. It is 172 feet long, including a ram of
twenty-seven feet in length. One of her special qualities is the power of
launching torpedoes from almost any point, from cylinders specially
constructed for the purpose, that at the bow being thirty-two feet in
length. A torpedo-boat, built by the Messrs. Yarrow, of Poplar, for the
Russian Government during the late war, appears to have special merits. It
is built of light steel, with what is called a “whale-back”—a
semi-circular covering, which resists any ordinary shot and throws off any
sea whatever. The funnel is not in the centre, but towards the side, in
order not to interfere with the steersman’s view nor with the torpedo
boom. It has a boom which can be lowered in the water, the torpedo being
submerged ten feet before it is started off on its deadly errand. And,
finally, it can be projected from the stern, which gives it a splendid
chance of leaving before the final explosion.
In the late Turko-Russian war torpedoes were often attached to logs of
wood or clumps of brushwood, and floated into the stream of the Danube.
These often attracted little attention; and when they came into contact
with any obstacle the mine exploded by means of percussion, the blow being
delivered by a projecting arm or other contrivance driven back upon some
detonating substance within. The Harvey torpedo, one of the leading types,
consists of a stout wooden casing, strengthened on the outside with iron
straps, and containing a metal shell, which holds the powder charge. The
largest size of this weapon measures 4 feet 6 inches in length by 2 feet
in depth, and 2 feet 6 inches in width, and carries 100 lbs. of dynamite.
The torpedo is fired by being brought into hugging contact with an enemy’s
ship, when one or other of two projecting levers acts upon an exploding
bolt causing the ignition of the charge. The exploding apparatus consists
of a tube containing a chemical agent and a bulb holding another. The
nature of these chemicals is such that when they combine violent
combustion ensues, which explodes the charge. These torpedoes are towed at
the end of a long hawser, connected to a spar, so arranged that the
torpedo itself, instead of following immediately in the wake or trail of
the vessel towing it, diverges in the same manner that an otter float
does: from which device Captain Harvey took his idea. Attached to the
torpedo are two large buoys, for the purpose of supporting it when the
vessel is not moving through the water, or when the towing-line is
slackened. Another variety is fired by electricity.
The Whitehead, or “fish” torpedo, is a cigar-shaped steel cylinder 14 to
19 feet in length, and from 14 to 16 inches in diameter. It is sent off,
requiring no crew, against the ship to be destroyed; and if one torpedo
fails to deal the death-blow it can be followed up by another, or yet a
third. It consists of three compartments. The head contains the
explosive—say 360 lbs. of gun-cotton; the centre holds the machinery; and
the tail the highly-condensed air which works the engine. The engine is
about thirty-five pounds weight, and can be worked to forty horse power!
The explanation of this is simply that the working pressure of the
condensed air is 1,000 lbs. per square inch. The tail holds compressed air
sufficient to propel the torpedo 200 yards, at a rate of twenty-five miles
an hour, or 1,000 yards at the rate of seventeen miles.
The “battle of the guns” has not yet been fought; but how about the rams?
They have been proved the deadliest weapons of destruction in modern
times. The lessons of Lissa have been already cited in these pages; so
have the lessons taught by the loss of the _Vanguard_ and the _Grosser
Kurfurst_. In the latter cases it was friends that struck the blow. Some
of our greatest authorities consider that nothing can exceed the power of
the ram of a modern ironclad, properly applied. Admiral Touchard, of the
French Navy, says: “The ‘beak’ (_i.e._ ‘ram’) is now the principal weapon
in naval combats—the _ultima ratio_ of maritime war.” Captain Colomb, a
distinguished English authority, says: “Let us just recall the fact that
the serious part of a future naval attack does not appear to be the guns,
but the rams.” Yet again another authority, Captain Pellew, says: “Rams
are the arm of naval warfare to which I attach the chief importance. In my
opinion, the aim of all manœuvring and preliminary practice with the guns
should be to get a fair opportunity for ramming.”