The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

: MERCANTILE AUXILIARIES. LORD BRASSEY FAVORS THE ADOPTION OF A DEFINITE POLICY LOOKING TO THE CONVERSION OF OCEAN LINERS INTO AUXILIARY CRUISERS. Lord Brassey, one of the most distinguished of naval authorities, addressed the Institution of Naval Architects in Glasgow recently upon the subject of "Mercantile Auxiliaries." - He is decidedly in favor of the conversion of ocean liners into auxiliary cruisers--a policy which was adopted by the United States during the war with Spain. He favors also a definite annual allowance in the naval bill for this purpose and claims that even the most liberal appropriation would be economy--particularly when one contrasts the cost of converting a liner into a cruiser and the cost of building a criser originally. Lord Brassey said: In bringing forward proposals for a more vigorous policy in relation to mercantile auxiliaries, I return to a subject. in which, following the lead. of Sir Nathaniel Barnaby and other authorities, I have long been deeply interested. The history of the question may be. briefly traced. The earliest contracts for the conveyance of the mails required that postal vessels should be suitable for conversion into armed cruisers, In 1853, upon the recommendation of the committee on postal contracts, those wise stipulations were withdrawn. It is a notable circumstance that, at the same date, iron was condemned as a material for the construction of fighting ships. - After the lapse of a quarter of a century, the subject was taken up by Sir Nathaniel Barnaby. His views were presented for the consideration of this institution in a paper, read in the session of 1877, on the fighting power of the merchant ship. Sir Nathaniel Barnaby insisted on the impossibility of providing adequately forthe protection of our vast commerce with regularly-built vessels of war. It was impossible to say what number of fast cruising ships would be sufficient for England, seeing that we should never know in what part of the world we should be attacked. It was necessary, therefore, to supplement--and largely to 'supplement--our regular cruisers with auxilary vessels. Sir. Nathaniel Barnaby's recommendations found powerful supporters. . : Admiral Sir Frederick Gray spoke as follows: "Having been at the _ admiralty, and having felt the difficulty of providing, even in peace time, the force necessary to fulfil the various duties devolving on our ships of war, I think it would be utterly impossible to provide sufficient protection for our mercantile marine in time of war. I believe that the merchant steamers of England, if strengthened and fitted as proposed by Mr. Barnaby, would be very useful. I do not say that they would take the 'place of men-of-war, but they would be most useful as auxiliaries." In the same discussion Sir Spencer Robinson, then the comptroller of the navy, expressed himself in these words: '"Those splendid ships which _ pass between the United States and England with very great speed, and a coal-carrying capacity far exceeding the coal-carrying capacity you can give to any unarmored man-of-war, could be made capable of carrying such an armament as would protect them from the attacks of vessait of a similar class to their own." These views of the naval advisers of the admiralty, vainly urged a gen- eration ago, have been fully shared, and practically adopted, by the naval advisers of foreign powers. I may quote the remarks of Admiral Fournter 'in his able pamphlet entitled, '"'La Flotte Nécessaire": 'As types of fast cruisers for the destruction of commerce, I know of nothing which more fully meets the requirements than those magnificent transatlantic steam- ships, the Lucania and Campania, capable of maintaining a speed of 22 knots an hour with extraordinary uniformity. The New York, Paris, St. Louis and St. Paul, and the English ships. Majestic and Teutonic, possess the same qualities, though in a somewhat less degree of perfec- oe Such ships will, in my view, be the destroyers of commerce in the uture. While their chief naval and technical advisers were endeavoring to obtain the assent of the board of admiralty to some practical action, the subject was not neglected out of doors. In 1878 a paper was published in the Nautical Magazine by the late Lord Inverclyde. I quote his weighty words, as true today as when they were written: "There never was a time in the history of this country when the subject of the efficiency of the royal navy occupied a position of greater importance than it does at present. Our risks lie in the fact that the fleets of other nations are fast becoming powerful and reliable; and whilst. no navy can numerically approach that of this country, yet there are. nations in Europe whose fleets combined would undoubtedly give us enough to cope with. How then can we stride ahead as the greatest maritime power, and hold our own against the fleets of the world? Not by being satisfied with increas- ing the strength of the navy proper, which, owing to the prodigious cost of modern war vessels, can only be done in a comparatively small degree. But what cannot be accomplished in this direction can be attained by other means ready to our hand, and that by utilising the vessels of the mercantile marine." : oie Ey INCREASE IN COST OF CRUISERS. : -At the date of Lord Inverclyde's paper the cost of our most powerful cruisers was under a quarter of a million. The cost of the first-class © cruisers we are now building is more than threefold greater. The prac- tical steps which Lord Inverclyde recommended to the admiralty are briefly described in his paper. 'There was wanted a scheme by which the advantages of the vast fleet of merchant steamers now belonging to the country should be conserved for our special requirements, and it was due to our naval authorities to admit that they had recognized that there were numerous British vessels which could easily be converted into cruisers. There was, however, one fatal flaw in the admiralty plan--they wanted to have the use of the ships without paying an adequate considera-_ 'tion. As Lord Inverclyde put it: "It was not to be supposed that a position for their vessels on the select list would be a, sufficient induce- ment to comply with admiralty requirements, and to incur the expense --- .. - MARINE REVIEW. __ Uuly 2, involved in exacting the requisite alterations. War being only a con. tingency more or less remote, a retaining fee must.be offered." It. was proposed by Lord Inverclyde that subsidised steamers should be built to meet certain requirements, including increased bulkheads and water- tight compartments. The ships should be manned by seamen of the Royal Naval Rerserve, who should be thoroughly trained in gunnery at the respective home ports of the companies OF Owners, th The subject of mercantile auxiliaries continued to attract the attention of our highest authorities on naval administration. In 1880 Sir Donald Currie read an exhaustive paper at the United Service Institution, He referred to the general increase in naval preparations. France had in- creased her navy; Germany and Russia were making large strides in the direction of more powerful naval forces. Quite recently the Russian volunteer fleet had been originated by Prince Dolgorouki, the governor- general of Moscow. He addressed himself to the wealthy merchants of that ancient capital, appealing to their patriotism, anda Volunteer cruisers' fund had been raised. Sir Donald Currie submitted a scheme for the retention of swift merchant cruisers by an annual subsidy. I may refer to another ship- owner, most eminent in that branch of enterprise with which he was connected. I refer to the late Mr. Ismay. In the evidence which he gave before the royal commission on coaling stations he truly said: "When a company has not, been doing well, and has got heavy bills running which it cannot meet, the temptation to. shut its eyes to what would be the ultimate designation of ships sold to foreigners ina crisis would be very great. At the commencement of the Russian scare, on the occasion of the Penjdeh incident, great temptations were offered to the owners of the White Star steamers running between San Francisco and Japan; and it was not too much to say that our whole commerce in the Pacific would have been transferred to the flag of the United States if that offer had been accepted." The British ownership of a magnificent | steamship is a slight national tie. It binds to no national: service while it exists, and it may be broken without warning at the will of the owners. These considerations may be pleaded as a strong argument in support of the policy of binding all our finest vessels to the service of the state-as mercantile auxiliaries. © pie Passing on:to the later authorities, the practicability of so constructing merchant steamers as to render them readily available for. war purposes was discussed by Mr. Biles in a paper read at an engineering conference; held under the auspices of the Institution of Civil. Engineers in' June, 1899. Arguing from the results of arming and fighting the: mercantile cruisers of the United States navy, Mr. Biles takes the view that such vessels are not unable to cope with thoroughbred warships. The ex- periences of modern sea fights point to. the conclusion that a ship is more liable to be disabled by her crew being driven from their guns than to be sunk by the effects of shell-fire. The issue of a fight between a war. ship and a merchant ship may not turn on the relative efficiency of the internal subdivision, but on the protection of the-guns. By. placing the guns ina box battery, as the Americans did; a considerable number of guns could be as well protected in merchant ships as in first-class cruisers. Mr. Biles holds it to be practicable, with due consideration in. the early stages: of design and construction, to so protect machinery and armament that the merchant ship need not be much, if at all, inferior to many warships. ADVANTAGE OF LIBERAL SUBSIDIES. The policy of liberal subsidies to the mercantile marine has, given to the merchant navies of foreign powers a decided advantage in the posses- sion of the types of vessels most suitable for naval purposes. The Ger- mans have taken the lead. They have two ships now running--the Deutschland and the -Kaiser Wilhelm of 14,000 tons and 15,000 tons re- spectively--which exceed in speed by nearly two knots our best ships. No vessel now building for the British flag will rival.in speed the Kaiser Wilhelm II and Kronprinz Wilhelm, under construction in Germany. Of ships capable of a regular sea speed of over 18 knots, France has four, Germany eight, and Great Britain ten. Taking vessels above 3,000 tons ony ree statistics, as quoted by Mr. Biles, give the relative positions as follows: British. Foreign. 20nkerists and (Gperl.. i eg ao 6 6 19 to: 20 knots rei ee SS A eed iT 18 to. 19? knots: ¢.3 3 i hacia « boats a ees SLi 9 4 I cto. 18" knots: ce. cdlgie bless Gi eee a pe a 23 18 LG torli knots: ce oiwcinsl. Ge wkend 17 18 55. 5G It is an ominous fact that in the last eight years we have added only one ocean-going 18-knot ship to our navy, while Germany has built four in the last four years. It is another ominous fact that, while we equal the combined merchant navies of the world in aggregate tonnage, of the 157 ships of 16 knots and over less than one-half the number are under the British flag. If we examine the lists of mercantile auxiliaries of the several powers, we find that France has thirty-two vessels, the latest additions, the Lorraine and Savoie, having a' displacement' of over 11,000 tons. The speeds of the French subsidized steamers have been constantly increasing from the 15 knots of twenty years ago to the 17, 18 and 19 knots of modern types. The armaments provided for each ship include seven 5.5-in. guns and smaller quick-firers. In numbers the German auxiliaries do not compare with the French. There are, however, six ships of the first class, which, as has already been observed, hold the record in the international competition on the North Atlantic. The armaments 'pre- pared for the German mercantile auxiliaries include eight 5-in. guns, four 4.7-in., four smaller quick-firers, and fourteen machine guns. The' Russian fleet of auxiliary steamers consists of twenty-five vessels. In displace- ment each of these ships exceeds 10,000 tons, with speeds of 19% to 20 knots. The British list of reserve merchant cruisers compares unfavorably with those of foreign powers. It consists of twenty-nine vessels; none being fitted with special protective arrangements. With these comparisons before us, we must regret that so little heed should have been, paid to the counsels of the able men to whom I referred in the opening of this paper; how little is attested by the fact that the amount. payable to the owners of our reserve merchant cruisers under. the naval, estimates now. before parliament is £63,000 out of a total of £2,000,000 which parliament is asked to vote for the navy. While we have taken no adequate measures to create a fleet of mercantile --