Part 4

In a calm and usually dark night, the ships at anchor, either in one line or parallel lines, or promiscuously. The Torpedo boats to be formed into divisions, each division to consist of fifty boats, and to attack one ship. Suppose the ships first attacked to be those nearest the land; in a calm they could not get under way, nor could they change their positions; a ship, by having a spring on her cable, might possibly bring her broadside to bear on the boats; but as the fire of the broadside could do little injury until the boats were within four hundred and thirty-eight yards, or three minutes, of her bow, and, as three minutes after coming within the line of fire is to decide the contest, I conceive that her broadside could not protect her; if the boats, at six hundred yards distance, run for her bow, it would be impossible for her to change her position so quick by a spring on her cable, as the boats could change their direction to keep under her bow. If the ships were in one line, and the headmost first attacked, she could receive no assistance from the vessel astern, for she would lie between the stern ship and the boats, and receive the fire which might be directed for them. If the ships lay in several parallel lines, or promiscuously, and the next line were on her larboard, the larboard ship would be distant at least one hundred fathoms, and while the boats were bearing down, might fire broadsides on them when they were at the distance of two hundred yards; but the moment they closed in with the ship she must cease her fire, otherwise she would do more injury to the ship than to the boats; the larboard ship would, therefore, only have an opportunity to fire two minutes at the boats, in which time, she might possibly discharge two broadsides; but as the boats could keep in a line with the bow of the vessel attacked, and there is more danger from the larboard or starboard ship than the one attacked, a better mode would be to attack the headmost ship of each line at the same time; in such case, each ship would be necessitated to reserve her whole fire for her own defence; she could not assist the next ship, and thus each vessel would be as much exposed and left to her own resources, as though there were not another ship within three leagues of her. The succeeding ships of the line, or lines, could be attacked in like manner: hence, this mode of attacking any number of vessels with an equal number of divisions of boats, amounts to nothing more than a repetition of an attack with fifty boats on one ship, and it does not appear to me possible, that her fire could repel fifty boats, or prevent them lodging ten, fifteen, or twenty harpoons, if necessary, in her larboard and starboard bow. I leave to nautical men and experienced commanders, to shew to the public how a ship or ships of war, anchored in a calm as before stated, could resist such an attack, and their total destruction in a few hours.

But commanders, seeing the danger of being becalmed while at anchor, may keep the fleet under way.

SECOND MODE OF ATTACK

In the night, the ships under way, calm, or light breezes of not more than four knots an hour. Ships of the line, that are under way, seldom approach nearer each other than a cable's length; this precaution, is to prevent their running foul and causing confusion; when expecting an enemy of equal force, the custom is to form one line; admitting, that to oppose the Torpedo boats, they preserved this usual order of battle, close hauled and under easy sail, to let the boats come up, here, as in the case of being at anchor, each ship must apply her whole fire against the division of boats which attack her; she cannot aid the ship next to her. As the boats, advancing under cover of the night, each division will, in three minutes from the time they arrive within danger of cannon shot, be in with the bow of the destined ship, and fire their harpoons into her. Therefore it appears, that her chance while under way is very little better than when at anchor. If, as the boats advance, a ship turns her bow to meet them, she facilitates their harpooning her. Will any other order of battle than one right line, give more security? Would two, three, or four parallel lines, give better protection? In such case, the line nearest the boats would be attacked first, and the other lines taken in succession. Were the ships to form a crescent, the headmost vessels would be first attacked, in this form, they might surround a number of boats and get them between two fires; but whatever situation the boats may be in, after they arrive within the range of grape-shot they can, in a few minutes, be under the bow of the ship, where they will be safe from all fire except small arms; but to arrive under her bow, amounts to a moral certainty of effecting her destruction. Therefore, with the immense advantage which Torpedoes give to an attack with boats, it is of little consequence whether it be made in the night or day, in a calm or a breeze of from four to six knots. If the ships engage with the boats, their case will be desperate. In all my reflections on this kind of war, I see no chance for their escape other than by retreat; and the moment English ships of war retreat before Torpedo boats, that moment the power of the British marine is for ever lost, and with it the political influence of the nation.

In this view of chances, I have calculated the number of men in the boats equal to the number in the ships, and estimated five thousand boats to be brought into action; but in all cases when there are sufficient Torpedo boats to drive in the boats of the ships, there will be sufficient to attack the fleet; the one hundred ships could not put six hundred good boats in motion, therefore, one thousand Torpedo boats would suffice for the attack; they could be formed into fifty divisions of twenty boats each; they would have every advantage, in a calm, of directing fifty or one hundred boats against one vessel, while the ships would not have the power to concentrate their fire on the boats; the ships could not be defended, unless there were transports or ordinance vessels expressly for carrying good row-boats, the number of which should be sufficient to repel the Torpedo boats; but if ships can only be protected by boats, it follows, that they will cease to be of use, and the contest for the command of the channel must be decided by boat fighting. In such case, the nation which could put in action the greatest number of boats, and was least dependent on commerce, would have a decided advantage. England is more dependent on commerce than France; her merchant vessels could be attacked, destroyed, and her trade ruined; yet the commerce of France could not be more, nor so much, injured as it is at present. In such an event, England, who has usurped the dominion of the ocean and laid all nations under contribution, would be the most humble supplicant for the liberty of the seas. And then the Emperor of France would have a noble opportunity to display a magnanimity of soul, a goodness of heart, which would add lustre to his great actions, and secure to him the admiration of the civilized world, by granting to so ingenious, industrious, enterprising, and estimable a people, a perfect liberty of commerce.[M]

[Footnote M: A government, and particularly a monarchy or aristocracy, may be in the habitual practice of vice, while the people are in the habitual practice of virtue. In an aristocracy, where the army, navy, places, and pensions, are in the power of the few, the voice of the people has little or no influence. The genius, industry, and enterprise of the English, have converted a barren island into the most fruitful and beautiful spot on earth; their improvements in the useful arts, have made them the greatest and most useful manufacturing people that ever existed. In proportion as the people, by their industry, increased the riches of the nation, the government found a facility in raising revenue, and have loaded the virtuous people with taxes to the amount of twenty-five or more millions a year, to pay for ruinous wars, the conquest of America, the establishment of the Bourbons, and the balance of Europe.]

I have now run this subject to a conclusion, in which I do not hesitate to say, that two thousand Torpedo boats and twenty-four thousand men, would take the command of the British channel from Boulogne to Romney, from Calais, Gravelines, Dunkirk and Ostend, to the mouth of the Thames, and that the command of the commerce of those narrow seas, would command the British nation; but there the power of Torpedo boats must cease--a nation cannot send such boats to sea to depredate on commerce, nor to foreign countries on expeditions of conquest, and therefore the seas must be free.

ON

_the imaginary inhumanity of Torpedo war_

In numerous discussions which I have had on this subject and its consequences, it has been stated, that instead of giving liberty to the seas, its tendency would be to encourage piracy and buccaneering, by enabling a few men in a boat to intimidate and plunder merchant vessels, thereby producing greater evil than the existing military marines. This idea, is similar to one which might have arisen on the invention of muskets, which, giving to an individual the power of certain death at the distance of fifty or a hundred yards, robbers might infest the highways, and from an ambush, shoot the traveller and take his property; yet there is not so much robbery now as before the invention of gun-powder; society is more civilized; it is not so much divided into feuds, or clans, to secrete and protect villainy; and all civilized society will, in their own defence, combine against the robber, who has little chance to escape. In like manner, as an individual, instigated by revenge, might with an air-gun shoot his neighbour, or by means of gun-powder blow up his barn or buildings; but society combine against such atrocious acts, and he who would commit them, could have little other prospect before him than the gibbet. In the case of pirates or buccaneers, they could not make a Torpedo without some intelligent workmen, who would be a means of discovery. Were they to take a prize, they must have some port to carry it to, or it could be of no use to them; were they to plunder a ship, they could not carry much in a Torpedo boat, and the boat must have a port to go to, where neighbours or spectators, observing her suspicious character, would lead to investigation; added to which, pirates are seldom constant in their attachment to each other, and each would suspect the other turning informer. It would be difficult for a Torpedo boat to depart from any port of America, and return without being detected. It is certainly much more easy and secure for an individual to go on the highway and rob, yet how seldom is that done. When nations combine against pirates, there is no reason to fear that individuals can make a bad use of this invention.

But men, without reflecting, or from attachment to established and familiar tyranny, exclaim, that it is barbarous to blow up a ship with all her crew. This I admit, and lament that it should be necessary; but all wars are barbarous, and particularly wars of offence. It is barbarous for a ship of war to fire into a peaceable merchant vessel, kill part of her people, take her and the property, and reduce the proprietor with his family from affluence to penury. It was barbarous to bombard Copenhagen, set fire to the city, and destroy innocent women and children. It would be barbarous for ships of war to enter the harbour of New-York, fire on the city, destroy property, and murder many of the peaceable inhabitants; yet we have great reason to expect such a scene of barbarism and distress, unless means are taken to prevent it; therefore, if Torpedoes should prevent such acts of violence, the invention must be humane.

When a fortress is besieged, and a mine driven under the citadel, the powder laid, and the train ready to light, it is the custom for the besiegers to send to the commander of the besieged, to inform him of the preparations, and leave it to his judgment to surrender or risque the explosion; if he will not surrender after such warning, and he, with his men, should be blown up, he is to be charged with the inhumanity, and not the besiegers. Should government adopt Torpedoes as a part of our means of defence, the Europeans will be informed of it, after which, should they send hostile ships into our ports among anchored Torpedoes or Torpedo boats, and such ships should be blown up, the inhumanity must be charged to them, and not to the American government or to this invention.

Having, in the preceding chapter, given details for a system of French Torpedo boats, which could command the narrow parts of the British channel, I may be accused of enmity to England and partiality to France; yet I have neither hatred nor particular attachment to any foreign country. I admire the ingenuity, industry, and good faith of the English people; I respect the arts, sciences, and amiable manners of the people of France. There is much in each of those countries which we may copy to great advantage. But my feelings are wholly attached to my country, and while I labour for her interest in this enterprise, I am happy that the liberty of the seas, which I believe can be effected, will not only benefit America; it will be an immense advantage to England, to France, and to every other nation. Convinced of this, I have viewed military marines as remains of ancient warlike habits, and an existing political disease, for which there has hitherto been no specific remedy. Satisfied in my own mind, that the Torpedoes now discovered, will be an effectual cure for so great an evil. To introduce them into practice, and prove their utility, I am of opinion, that blowing up English ships of war, or French, or American, were there no other, and the men on shore, would be humane experiments of the first importance to the United States and to mankind.

A VIEW

_of the political economy of this invention_

At the death of Queen Elizabeth, in 1602, the royal navy consisted of the following vessels.

4 ships of 40 guns. 4 of 32 10 of 30 2 of 20 3 of 16 2 of 12 5 of 10 3 of 8 1 of 6 4 of 4 4 of 2 -- --- Total 42 180 guns, with 3 hoys.

When equipped for sea, it carried 8376 men.

At the death of King James I. in 1665, the royal navy amounted to sixty-two sail; the money expended per annum was fifty thousand pounds sterling, equal to 222,222 dollars, 20 cents.

At the death of King William, in 1701-2, the navy consisted of

Ships of the line, including fourth rates; 123 Frigates 46 Fire Ships 87 --- Total 256

The whole navy mounting about 9300 guns, and to completely man the ships, it would take 52,000 men; the sum allowed per annum for the navy, was 1,046,397 pounds sterling, equal to 4,650,653 dollars, 30 cents. Thus in one century, it increased in vessels and men six fold, and in expence twenty fold.

In 1801, the royal navy consisted of 192 ships of the line } 28 ships of 50 guns } 227 frigates } 181 sloops } Principal force for combat, 760 96 gun vessels } 11 gun barges } 15 bombs } 10 fire ships } 11 store ships 8 yachts 9 tenders 2 advice boats 5 armed transports 13 Dutch hoys 6 river barges 1 convalescent ship 130 hired ships and cutters. --- Total 945

Annual expence, 13,654,013 pounds sterling, equal 60,684,502 dollars, 40 cents; at present, I have not time to ascertain the exact number of men, which however amount to more than one hundred thousand.

From 1701 to 1801, the number of vessels have been increased four fold, and the expence twelve fold; the expence is now two hundred and seventy times greater than at the death of King James I, one hundred and eighty-five years ago.

STATE OF THE MARITIME POWER OF NATIONS ABOUT THE YEAR 1790

Taken from Arnauld

+--------------+------------+------------+-------+------+------- | Ships of | | | Total | Total| Total Nations | the Line | Frigates | Sloops |Vessels|Cannon| Seamen ---------+--------------+------------+------------+-------+------+------- | ships guns | guns | | | | | | | | | | | from to| from to| | | | Spain | 72 112 - 58| 41 |109 | 222 |10,000| 50,000 Portugal | 10 80 - 58| 14 44 - 30| 29 | 53 | 1,500| 1,000 Naples | 10 74 - 50| 10 | 12 | 32 | 1,000| 5,000 Venice | 20 88 - 16| 10 | 58 | 88 | 1,000| 14,000 Ottoman | | | | | | Empire | 30 74 - 50| 50 50 - 10|100 galliots| 180 | 3,000| 50,000 Holland | 44 74 - 56| 43 40 - 24|100 | 187 | 2,300| 15,000 Denmark | 38 90 - 50| 20 42 - 20| 60 chebecks| 118 | 3,000| 12,000 Sweden | 27 74 - 50| 12 38 - 20| 40 gallies | 79 | 3,000| 13,000 Russia | 67 110 - 66| 36 44 - 28|700 various | 803 | 9,000| 21,000 France | 81 118 - 64| 69 40 - 30|141 various | 291 |14,000| 78,000 England |195 100 - 50|210 |256 | 661 |12,000|100,000 ---------+--------------+------------+------------+-------+------+------- 2714 59,800 359,000

Taking the whole of these fleets, and estimating their expence by that of the British marine, it must amount to about twenty-six millions of pounds sterling per annum, equal to 115,555,555 dollars, 50 cents. Can we reflect on this table and not feel, in the most sensible manner, the folly of the eleven European nations, who support such establishments for their mutual oppression? Is there an American who, after viewing these horrid consequences of divided Europe and her barbarous policy, that can for a moment harbour a wish, that these happy States should be divided, and each petty government, in proportion to its resources, augment its fleets and armies either for defence or to gratify a mad ambition, by depredating on its neighbours? If there be such men, they are in a state of political insanity, and the worst enemies to the American people. The humane and excellent Dean Tucker, in his work on political economy, published during the American revolution, has observed, "That the wars of Europe, for the last two hundred years, have, by the confession of all parties, really ended in the advantage of none, but to the manifest detriment of all. Suffice it to remark, that had each of the contending powers employed their subjects in cultivating and improving such lands as were clear of all disputed titles, instead of aiming at more extended possessions, they had consulted both their own and their people's greatness much more efficaciously, than all the victories of a Cesar or an Alexander." This important truth should be deeply impressed on the mind of every American.

But I will return to the fleets of Europe, and endeavour to point out the principal causes of the great increase of those engines of oppression, and from whence the wealth has arisen to support such expences. I will also shew the increasing resources which will, if science does not check it, enable England hereafter to support a marine of fifteen hundred armed ships, with as much ease as she now does seven hundred and sixty.

In 1602, the British nation could not possibly have paid for the expence of such a navy as it possessed in 1701, and in 1701, the resources of the nation were not equal to the expence of the navy of 1801. The reason is, that since 1602, the sciences have developed immense resources. Chemistry and mechanics have multiplied the produce of productive labour, and increased the riches of every nation in Europe; the commerce of China and the East-Indies has been opened; Russia and Sweden have become civilized and commercial; South America, the West India islands, and North America, have, from a few hundred persons, grown to a population of at least twenty-five millions; who have created a vast and productive commerce, of which there was no conception two centuries ago. Agriculture has every where been improved; the earth produces more for a given labour; manufactures are carried on, in various degrees of perfection, in every country and district of country, which, creating surplus wealth to pay for luxuries, returns millions of riches on so enterprising and commercial a people as the English, which, added to their own improvements in mechanism, manufactures, and agriculture, enables the government, at this day, to expend thirteen millions of pounds sterling, annually, on their marine. Yet the people in general live better, have more enjoyments, and because they have more enjoyments, they are in reality not more oppressed than the people of 1625, who paid only fifty thousand pounds to the marine. Such is the natural consequence of a general cultivation of the useful arts; but a just government and a wise people, should take care that the wealth which the useful arts give to them, should not be uselessly expended.

As imports and exports are the consequence of increased population and industry, the following will shew how the expences of the British marine have not only kept pace, but gained on her sources of wealth.

_Table of British Imports, Exports, and Expence of the Marine, in pounds sterling._

In 1701 Imports 5,869,609_l._ Exports 7,621,053_l._ -------------- Total 13,490,662_l._

_Expence of the Marine_

1,046,397_l._ or one thirteenth of the whole imports and exports.

In 1798 Imports 46,963,000_l._ Export of British manufactures 33,602,000_l._ Export of foreign goods 14,387,000_l._ -------------- Total 94,952,000_l._

_Expence of the Navy_

13,654,013_l._ or about one seventh of the total imports and exports.

In 1800, the population of the United States was estimated at 5,214,801; with this population, we import from England to the amount of seven millions sterling per annum, for which we pay, in direct and circuitous trade, equal seven millions, making our imports from England, and exports to pay for them fourteen millions, or equal to one seventh of the imports and exports of England. Therefore, as it is the profits of trade which support the British marine, we pay one seventh of its whole expence, or about two millions sterling, and, in fact, support one seventh of seven hundred and sixty armed ships, equal 108. Thus we cherish an evil of which we complain, and unless we can destroy it, we must continue to nourish it.

In 1700, the population of England and Wales amounted to 5,475,544; in 1800, to 9,343,578; it did not double in the last century notwithstanding the great increase of trade. As her population is now equal to one person for every six acres, there is a powerful check on its increase, and the rational calculation is, that it will not double, or rise to eighteen millions in the next two centuries. But the United States is doubling its population in about twenty-five years, or, for probable correctness, say in thirty years; consequently, in