Comparisons of European Navies.

Te Aroha News, Volume V, Issue 211, 16 July 1887, Page 5 (Supplement)

Comparisons of European Navies.

One interesting part of Lloyd's "New Universal Register "' is an attempt to state the relative strength of che navies of the world. All such estimates aie, of course, to be taken with reserve. In the problem there are elements which elude the statistician. The data aie far from trustworthy. We know that naval constructors fight as fiercely over matters of theory as navies are ever likely to do in actual warfare, and that the figures are in dispute. But it is interesting to bee in tabular form details, more or less accurate, as to the speed, armour and penetrating power of the guns of the navies of the world. These figures are much less satisfactory than those relative to the mercantile marine. The protecting force is not commensurate with that which must be protected ; the strength of the English navy is apparent in these tables, but .so also are the multifarious and almost limitless demands upon it. In point of speed it does not appear to suffer from a comparison. France has 22 vessels, carrying 93 guns, and able to steam 17 knots or more an hour ; Germany has 5, with an armament of 34 guns, while England has 42 such vessels, carrying 327 guns. If we turn to vessels, steaming more than 14 knots an hour, the eompaiison is less favourable ; the figures for this country appear to be 80 vessels with 790 guns, for France 69 with 699, and for Germany 35 with 285 guns. Besides, too, the speed with which our vessels are credited is estimated on the results shown in trial trips ; the ordinary results would be probably 2 or 3 knots less. A survey of the navies of the world from this point of view is far from reassuring ; and little satisfaction is derived from contemplating other details furnished by these tables. If correct, they appear to show that of guns capable of penetrating 12-inch armour England possesses 368 earned in 78 vessels, and France 153 in 50 vessels. The former has 15 vessels capable of resisting guns penetrating 18-inch armour. But in regard to vessels with still more powerful armour, the comparison is not what could be wished Things are far from being what they ought to be when it appears that this country possesses only eight coast defence armourclads of the type of the Cyclops and Glatton, with 7-inch armour, and that France has apparently no fewer than 15 vessels, such as the Vengeur, Ton nan t, and Tcmpete. These figures afford no ground for panic or attacks on the naval authorities of this country. But when we find England credited with only one ship capable of travelling twenty knots — the Swift — and Italy apparently owning ten such cruisers — when eve v y Continental country seems eager to get the latest improvements in naval architecture —we sec that it is no time to stand still or to curtail expenditure. Lloyd's records testify to activity and change in the mercantile marine— changes in materials, in build, in size, in motivepower, in rig. But that activity is not equal to what is everywhere visible in regard to ships of war. One can trace in the character of the vessels built from year to year the predominance of theoiies which were quickly abandoned. And there is no sign that the days of costly experimenting are over. The next edition of this work may chronicle the appearance of vessels totally unlike the floating fortresses, such as the Lepanto and Doria, which are now supposed by some to bo the perfection of naval architecture. — " London Times."