GENERAL REVIEW OF MILITARY EDUCATION

JOHN MARSTON,Commodore U.S. Navy, President.James A. Hamilton,New York.John Rodgers,Commodore U.S. Navy.Charles D. Robinson,Wisconsin.G. D. A. Parks,Illinois.C. W. Pickering,Capt. U.S. Navy.John W. Harris,Missouri.Henry Barnard,Connecticut.

JOHN MARSTON,Commodore U.S. Navy, President.

James A. Hamilton,New York.

John Rodgers,Commodore U.S. Navy.

Charles D. Robinson,Wisconsin.

G. D. A. Parks,Illinois.

C. W. Pickering,Capt. U.S. Navy.

John W. Harris,Missouri.

Henry Barnard,Connecticut.

The aggregate expense of the Military Academy at West Point, and the Naval Academy at Annapolis, to the country, is not represented by the specific sums which appear in the annual appropriation for the military and naval service, but is increased by the large sums paid to officers and men who are detailed to these posts for police, instructional, and other purposes of these institutions. The cost to the government of each cadet from his admission to his graduation in either Academy, exceeds $10,000.

Under authority of an Act of Congress (July 4, 1864), the Secretary of the Navy, in 1865, made provision at Annapolis for a course of instruction for a class of Assistant-Engineers, composed of persons admitted on competitive examination, many of whom had secured a preliminary scientific training, and all of whom gave evidence of aptitude for such occupation and of having had experience in the fabrication of steam machinery. There was every indication of a special school for this department of the naval service, when the enterprise was suspended; but to be revived under the following Regulations, issued by Secretary Robeson, April 4, 1871:

REGULATIONS FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF CADET ENGINEERS.

I. In pursuance of the third and fourth sections of an act passed at the first session of the 38th Congress, approved July 4, 1864, “To authorize the Secretary of the Navy to provide for the education of Naval Constructors and Engineers, and for other purposes,” and of the second section of an act passed at the first session of the 39th Congress, approved March 2, 1867, entitled, “An Act to amend certain acts in relation to the Navy,” applications will be received by the Navy Department for the appointment of Cadet Engineers.II. The application is to be addressed to the Secretary of the Navy, and can be made by the candidate, or by any person for him, and his name will be placed on the register. The registry of a name gives no assurance of an appointment, and no preference will be given in the selection to priority of application.III. The number of Cadet Engineers is limited by law to fifty. The candidate must be not less than eighteen nor more than twenty-two years of age; he will be required to certifyon honorto his precise age, to the Academic Board, previous to his examination, and no one will be examined who is over or under the prescribed age. His application must be accompanied by satisfactory evidence of moral character and health, with information regarding date of birth and educational advantages hitherto enjoyed. Candidates who receive permission will present themselves to the Superintendent of the Naval Academy between the 15th and 25th of September for examination as to their qualifications.IV. The course of study will comprise two academic years. All Cadets who graduate will be warranted as Assistant Engineers in the Navy. The pay of a Cadet Engineer is the same as that of a Cadet Midshipman.V. The academic examination previous to appointment will be on the following subjects, namely:Arithmetic: the candidate will be examined in numeration and the addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of whole numbers, and of vulgar and decimal fractions; in reduction; in proportion or rule of three, direct and inverse; extraction of square and cube roots. InAlgebra, (Bourdon’s,) through equations of the first degree. InGeometry, (Davies’ Legendre,) through the plane figures.Rudimentary Natural Philosophy. Reading: he must read clearly and intelligibly from any English narrative work, as, for example, Bancroft’s History of the United States. InWritingandSpelling: he must write from dictation, in a legible hand, and spell with correctness, both orally and in writing. In EnglishGrammarand EnglishCompositionhe will be examined as to the parts of speech, the rules connected therewith, and the elementary construction of sentences, and will be required to write such original paragraphs as will show that he has a proper knowledge of the subject. The candidate will also be required to exhibit a fair degree of proficiency in pencil-sketching, and to produce satisfactory evidence of mechanical aptitude. Candidateswho possess greatest skill and experience in the practical knowledge of machinery, other qualifications being equal, shall have precedence for admission.VI. Any of the following conditions will be sufficient to reject a candidate.Feeble constitution, permanently impaired general health, decided cachexia, all chronic diseases or injuries that permanently impair efficiency, viz:1. Infectious disorders.2. Weak or disordered intellect.3. Unnatural curvature of spine.4. Epilepsy, or other convulsion, within five years.5. Chronic impaired vision, or chronic disease of the organs of vision.6. Great permanent hardness of hearing, or chronic disease of the ears.7. Loss or decay of teeth to such an extent as to interfere with digestion and impair health.8. Impediment of speech to such an extent as to impair efficiency in the performance of duty.9. Decided indications of liability to pulmonary disease.10. Permanent inefficiency of either of the extremities.11. Hernia.12. Incurable sarcocele, hydrocele, fistula, stricture, or hæmorrhoids.13. Large varicose veins of lower limbs. Chronic ulcers.14. Attention will also be paid to the stature of the candidate, and no onemanifestlyundersized for his age will be received into the Academy. In case of doubt about the physical condition of the candidate any marked deviation from the usual standard of height will add materially to the consideration for rejection.15. The Board will exercise a proper discretion in the application of the above conditions to each case, rejecting no candidate who is likely to be efficient in the service, and admitting no one who is likely to prove physically inefficient.VII. If both these examinations result favorably, the candidate will receive an appointment as a Cadet Engineer, become an inmate of the Academy, and will be allowed his actual and necessary traveling expenses from his residence to the Naval Academy, and be required to sign articles by which he will bind himself to serve in the United States Navy six years, (including his term of probation at the Naval Academy,) unless sooner discharged. If, on the contrary, he shall not pass both of these examinations, he will receive neither an appointment nor his traveling expenses, nor can he have the privilege of another examination for admissionto the same classunless recommended by the Board.VIII. When candidates shall have passed the required examinations, and been admitted as members of the Academy, they must immediately furnish themselves with the following articles, viz:One navy-blue uniform suit,One fatigue suit,One navy-blue uniform cap,One uniform overcoat,Ten pairs of white pants,Four white vests,Six white shirts,Six pairs of socks,Four pairs of drawers,Six pocket handkerchiefs,One black silk handk’f or stock,One mattress,One pillow,One pair of blankets,One bed cover or spread,Two pairs of sheets,Four pillow cases,Six towels,Two pairs of shoes or boots,One hair-brush,One clothes-brush,One coarse comb for the hair,One fine comb for the hair,One tumbler or mug, andOne thread and needle case.Room-mates will jointly procure, for their common use, one looking-glass, one wash-basin, one water-pail, one slop-bucket, and one broom. These articles may be obtained from the store-keeper of good quality and at fair prices.IX. Each Cadet Engineer must, on admission, deposit with the paymaster the sum of seventy-five dollars, for which he will be credited on the books of that officer, to be expended by direction of the Superintendent for the purchase of text-books and other authorized articles besides those above enumerated.X. While at the Academy the Cadets will be examined, from time to time, according to the regulations prescribed by the Navy Department; and if found deficient at any examination, or dismissed for misconduct, they cannot, by law, be continued in the Academy or Naval service, except upon recommendation of the Academic Board.XI. A Cadet Engineer who voluntarily resigns his appointment will be required to refund the amount paid him for traveling expenses.

II. The application is to be addressed to the Secretary of the Navy, and can be made by the candidate, or by any person for him, and his name will be placed on the register. The registry of a name gives no assurance of an appointment, and no preference will be given in the selection to priority of application.

III. The number of Cadet Engineers is limited by law to fifty. The candidate must be not less than eighteen nor more than twenty-two years of age; he will be required to certifyon honorto his precise age, to the Academic Board, previous to his examination, and no one will be examined who is over or under the prescribed age. His application must be accompanied by satisfactory evidence of moral character and health, with information regarding date of birth and educational advantages hitherto enjoyed. Candidates who receive permission will present themselves to the Superintendent of the Naval Academy between the 15th and 25th of September for examination as to their qualifications.

IV. The course of study will comprise two academic years. All Cadets who graduate will be warranted as Assistant Engineers in the Navy. The pay of a Cadet Engineer is the same as that of a Cadet Midshipman.

V. The academic examination previous to appointment will be on the following subjects, namely:Arithmetic: the candidate will be examined in numeration and the addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of whole numbers, and of vulgar and decimal fractions; in reduction; in proportion or rule of three, direct and inverse; extraction of square and cube roots. InAlgebra, (Bourdon’s,) through equations of the first degree. InGeometry, (Davies’ Legendre,) through the plane figures.Rudimentary Natural Philosophy. Reading: he must read clearly and intelligibly from any English narrative work, as, for example, Bancroft’s History of the United States. InWritingandSpelling: he must write from dictation, in a legible hand, and spell with correctness, both orally and in writing. In EnglishGrammarand EnglishCompositionhe will be examined as to the parts of speech, the rules connected therewith, and the elementary construction of sentences, and will be required to write such original paragraphs as will show that he has a proper knowledge of the subject. The candidate will also be required to exhibit a fair degree of proficiency in pencil-sketching, and to produce satisfactory evidence of mechanical aptitude. Candidateswho possess greatest skill and experience in the practical knowledge of machinery, other qualifications being equal, shall have precedence for admission.

VI. Any of the following conditions will be sufficient to reject a candidate.

Feeble constitution, permanently impaired general health, decided cachexia, all chronic diseases or injuries that permanently impair efficiency, viz:

1. Infectious disorders.

2. Weak or disordered intellect.

3. Unnatural curvature of spine.

4. Epilepsy, or other convulsion, within five years.

5. Chronic impaired vision, or chronic disease of the organs of vision.

6. Great permanent hardness of hearing, or chronic disease of the ears.

7. Loss or decay of teeth to such an extent as to interfere with digestion and impair health.

8. Impediment of speech to such an extent as to impair efficiency in the performance of duty.

9. Decided indications of liability to pulmonary disease.

10. Permanent inefficiency of either of the extremities.

11. Hernia.

12. Incurable sarcocele, hydrocele, fistula, stricture, or hæmorrhoids.

13. Large varicose veins of lower limbs. Chronic ulcers.

14. Attention will also be paid to the stature of the candidate, and no onemanifestlyundersized for his age will be received into the Academy. In case of doubt about the physical condition of the candidate any marked deviation from the usual standard of height will add materially to the consideration for rejection.

15. The Board will exercise a proper discretion in the application of the above conditions to each case, rejecting no candidate who is likely to be efficient in the service, and admitting no one who is likely to prove physically inefficient.

VII. If both these examinations result favorably, the candidate will receive an appointment as a Cadet Engineer, become an inmate of the Academy, and will be allowed his actual and necessary traveling expenses from his residence to the Naval Academy, and be required to sign articles by which he will bind himself to serve in the United States Navy six years, (including his term of probation at the Naval Academy,) unless sooner discharged. If, on the contrary, he shall not pass both of these examinations, he will receive neither an appointment nor his traveling expenses, nor can he have the privilege of another examination for admissionto the same classunless recommended by the Board.

VIII. When candidates shall have passed the required examinations, and been admitted as members of the Academy, they must immediately furnish themselves with the following articles, viz:

One navy-blue uniform suit,One fatigue suit,One navy-blue uniform cap,One uniform overcoat,Ten pairs of white pants,Four white vests,Six white shirts,Six pairs of socks,Four pairs of drawers,Six pocket handkerchiefs,One black silk handk’f or stock,One mattress,One pillow,One pair of blankets,One bed cover or spread,Two pairs of sheets,Four pillow cases,Six towels,Two pairs of shoes or boots,One hair-brush,One clothes-brush,One coarse comb for the hair,One fine comb for the hair,One tumbler or mug, andOne thread and needle case.

One navy-blue uniform suit,

One fatigue suit,

One navy-blue uniform cap,

One uniform overcoat,

Ten pairs of white pants,

Four white vests,

Six white shirts,

Six pairs of socks,

Four pairs of drawers,

Six pocket handkerchiefs,

One black silk handk’f or stock,

One mattress,

One pillow,

One pair of blankets,

One bed cover or spread,

Two pairs of sheets,

Four pillow cases,

Six towels,

Two pairs of shoes or boots,

One hair-brush,

One clothes-brush,

One coarse comb for the hair,

One fine comb for the hair,

One tumbler or mug, and

One thread and needle case.

Room-mates will jointly procure, for their common use, one looking-glass, one wash-basin, one water-pail, one slop-bucket, and one broom. These articles may be obtained from the store-keeper of good quality and at fair prices.

IX. Each Cadet Engineer must, on admission, deposit with the paymaster the sum of seventy-five dollars, for which he will be credited on the books of that officer, to be expended by direction of the Superintendent for the purchase of text-books and other authorized articles besides those above enumerated.

X. While at the Academy the Cadets will be examined, from time to time, according to the regulations prescribed by the Navy Department; and if found deficient at any examination, or dismissed for misconduct, they cannot, by law, be continued in the Academy or Naval service, except upon recommendation of the Academic Board.

XI. A Cadet Engineer who voluntarily resigns his appointment will be required to refund the amount paid him for traveling expenses.

INTRODUCTION.

Underthe constitutional powers “to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States,” and “to provide and maintain a navy,” Congress, it is believed, can do more than is now done to provide both the military and commercial marine with intelligent, hardy and skillful sailors, as well as mates and captains, and to elevate the position of the whole seamen class.

The frightful accidents from explosions caused by badly constructed, or worn out steam-boilers, led to a system of national inspection which has done something to diminish the loss of life and property from this source, in vessels engaged in commerce on the ocean or our inland waters—but a system of instruction, examination, and promotion, under national authority, with national aid and the cöoperation of the mercantile community, of all persons intrusted with the command and navigation of all vessels, registered as national shipping, would put an end to all that class of disasters to life and property which is now attributableto ignorance and want of experience—and which is regarded by underwriters as much the largest portion of all marine disasters.

The necessity of doing something led to the establishment of the naval apprentice system, under the Act of March 2, 1837.

The original trial was not inaugurated under favorable conditions, and was prematurely abandoned, under the economical action of Congress which compelled the department to elect between men and boys for its arduous service. In 1864 the system was revived by Secretary Welles, a vessel was placed under the command of a competent officer, and a promising class of boys, after a preliminary examination were enlisted, and the work of their instruction was begun by training them in all the details of a sailor’s duty at sea. The Secretary in his Report for 1866, expressed himself hopeful of the results—but urged Congress to further legislation, to make the system attractive, by holding out to the most deserving members of the class, appointments to the Naval Academy, and a retiring pension after twenty years’ service. His suggestions were not heeded, and under the limitations of the Act of 1866 the trial failed.

Commodore Jenkins, Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, having cognizance of Naval Apprentices, in his Report for 1866, remarks:

A judicious naval apprentice system will secure to the navy every year, after the first enlisted boys are thoroughly trained and educated, a sufficient number of well-disciplined and better instructed seamen to give tone and character to the crews of our vessels of war than heretofore, and if the enlistments were unlimited it would require only a few years to provide all the seamen necessary for a formidable naval peace establishment.But it is not the navy alone that is or ought to be greatly interested in the success of the naval apprentice system. Every ship-owner and shipper in the country will be directly or indirectly benefited as well as the navy. Many of the apprentices will, at the expiration of their apprenticeship, seek service on board of merchant vessels, where the advantages of their previous training and education will be felt.If there were training-ships in every port of the United States for apprentices to the sea service, and the apprentices, after being taught the rudiments of an English education and all the seamanship that could be taught on board of a vessel in port, were sent on long sea voyages, the seamen of the country would soon become more elevated in character than they are at present, and ship-owners would realize the importance of cherishing and protecting a valuable class of our countrymen who are now left to the tender mercies of hard-hearted landlords, crimps, and runners.It is a great mistake to suppose that steam vessels can be managed well by landsmen at sea. The terrible shipwrecks, loss of numbers of individuals, and of millions of dollars’ worth of property annually on the ocean, is in the main attributable to bad management, ignorance, and want of experience of those in charge of the vessels. It is as necessary that sea steamers should be officered and manned by expert seamen as it was in former times for clipper and other sailing vessels. A good knowledge of seamanship is only to be acquired by a long apprenticeship; nor does the ability to navigate a vessel from one port to another make a man a seaman. There is no vocation, profession, or calling which requires a more varied knowledge and a greater experience than that of an expert seaman. It is not sufficient that he should know how to knot and splice a rope, to reef and furl a sail, to take his trick at the helm, or to give correct soundings in heaving the lead. He must be a good judge of the appearances of the weather, know how to lay his vessel to and under what canvas for safety, on what tack to put his vessel to avoid the strength of the approaching gale or hurricane, when to run and when to lie to, and he must be fertile in resources to save his vessel in case of danger or disaster at sea. The expert seaman is a man full of resources, and ever ready to turn his knowledge and experience to good account; but such is not the estimate of him by those who only know him as an outcast of society, without friends and without influence.As education and careful training elevate those who are engaged in the different pursuits on shore, the same means, if judiciously employed, will elevate and make useful and respectable in their sphere that much neglected and greatly oppressed class of our fellow-citizens—the American sailor.

But it is not the navy alone that is or ought to be greatly interested in the success of the naval apprentice system. Every ship-owner and shipper in the country will be directly or indirectly benefited as well as the navy. Many of the apprentices will, at the expiration of their apprenticeship, seek service on board of merchant vessels, where the advantages of their previous training and education will be felt.

If there were training-ships in every port of the United States for apprentices to the sea service, and the apprentices, after being taught the rudiments of an English education and all the seamanship that could be taught on board of a vessel in port, were sent on long sea voyages, the seamen of the country would soon become more elevated in character than they are at present, and ship-owners would realize the importance of cherishing and protecting a valuable class of our countrymen who are now left to the tender mercies of hard-hearted landlords, crimps, and runners.

It is a great mistake to suppose that steam vessels can be managed well by landsmen at sea. The terrible shipwrecks, loss of numbers of individuals, and of millions of dollars’ worth of property annually on the ocean, is in the main attributable to bad management, ignorance, and want of experience of those in charge of the vessels. It is as necessary that sea steamers should be officered and manned by expert seamen as it was in former times for clipper and other sailing vessels. A good knowledge of seamanship is only to be acquired by a long apprenticeship; nor does the ability to navigate a vessel from one port to another make a man a seaman. There is no vocation, profession, or calling which requires a more varied knowledge and a greater experience than that of an expert seaman. It is not sufficient that he should know how to knot and splice a rope, to reef and furl a sail, to take his trick at the helm, or to give correct soundings in heaving the lead. He must be a good judge of the appearances of the weather, know how to lay his vessel to and under what canvas for safety, on what tack to put his vessel to avoid the strength of the approaching gale or hurricane, when to run and when to lie to, and he must be fertile in resources to save his vessel in case of danger or disaster at sea. The expert seaman is a man full of resources, and ever ready to turn his knowledge and experience to good account; but such is not the estimate of him by those who only know him as an outcast of society, without friends and without influence.

As education and careful training elevate those who are engaged in the different pursuits on shore, the same means, if judiciously employed, will elevate and make useful and respectable in their sphere that much neglected and greatly oppressed class of our fellow-citizens—the American sailor.

Navigation Schools for the Mercantile Marine.

Whatever may be the success of still another trial of the apprentice system to secure a supply of trained seamen for the Navy, the experience of all other countries is decidedly in favor of a liberal system of Navigation Schools, as well as an efficient system of registration, examination, and certificates of competency and of service, administered under national inspection and with pecuniary aid, and under the local management of merchants, ship-owners, and underwriters, for the commercial marine.

Wecan not better introduce the conclusions to which this study of the subject has brought us, than by giving a few extracts from the many communications, which the recent agitation of naval education in England has elicited.

Proposed Improvements in Naval Education in England.

In 1869, the alternative was offered, on their own petition, to the 2,710 disabled seamen, who resided in the truly magnificent Hospital at Greenwich, on the Thames, which the national gratitude had set apart for their accommodation, when no longer able from wounds, age, or other infirmities to serve under “the meteor flag” of England—to continue there at the expense of the government, or draw their pensions and spend it in their own way, among their friends in their old homes, or wherever they fancied; only 31 elected to remain—and these were too feeble to leave, or had outlived their friends. The old Hospital infirmary, a large detached building, was granted by the Admiralty to the Seamen’s Hospital Society for the benefit of the mercantile marine; but the bulk of that immense pile—which is covered in by seven acres of roof, and whose domes and colonnades were designed by Sir Christopher Wren, and erected at a cost, from first to last, of not less than a million sterling—full of historic associations as the birthplace of Queen Elizabeth, and the residence of two dynasties of English kings, and the greater Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell, and for two centuries the home of the British Navy—for nearly two years has stood vacant. TheTimes, in an editorial of September 13, 1871, renews a suggestion made at the time the system of out pensions was under discussion, to continue its use for the Navy.

It is almost two years since we hazarded the suggestion that it should be converted into a Naval University. We used the term “University” in the sense of a collective institution, embracing several separate Colleges adapted to a similar purpose. We pointed out how inadequate in extent and in range of education is the present Royal Naval College at Portsmouth, the only institution we possess for supplying to Naval Officers what is termed a “higher education.” We also reminded our readers that the education of our Naval Cadets between the ages of 12 and 14 is now carried on in a School-ship, which, from the nature of things, must have many disadvantages in comparison with a building of ample space on the brink of a great river and on the border of aRoyal Park. We showed that there was already a great Charity-School in the rear of the Hospital, and supported by its funds, for the gratuitous education of 800 children of poor sailors; and we reckoned that the Hospital would still supply ample accommodation for a scheme, suggested to us on high authority, for furnishing at cost price to the children of seamen of all grades in the Navy and Commercial Marine, an education in English, French, the elements of science, and the ordinary rudiments of instruction.In the year 1870 the Admiralty appointed a committee on “the Higher Education of Naval Officers,” and directed them to consider whether it was desirable to limit the place of study to the College at Portsmouth, or whether the vacant buildings at Greenwich could be utilized for the purposes of education. The reported evidence of the Committee revealed a lamentable want of scientific knowledge in the naval profession. The witnesses were agreed in stating that few half-pay Officers had knowledge enough to study with advantage after the age of 30, and that few could, with advantage to the service and themselves, be spared to study before the age of 30. It was stated by the Mathematical Master that Commanders and Captains come to the College very badly prepared, and that “some come who are unable to work a decimal fraction.” They come, as the College is now organized, exclusively for scientific study, in which Mathematics are a necessity, and yet are destitute of the most elementary preparation. Of course there are a few brilliant exceptions, but the scientific attainments of the profession as a body appear to be deplorably low.In preparing a scheme for the improvement of what is so modestly termed “the higher education” of Naval Officers, the Committee proposed to add to the voluntary subjects of study a considerable number of practical pursuits. They proposed, under the advice of the late Chief Constructor of the Navy, to add both a short and a long course in Naval Architecture, in which there is at present absolutely no instruction given to Naval Officers. Such an education was supplied between the years 1806 and 1821, but since the latter year it has been altogether ignored and discouraged. It would require considerable space for the exhibition of models, and no sufficient room exists for it in the present College in Portsmouth Dockyard. The Committee proposed to furnish instruction, as now, in Steam, Mathematics, Nautical Astronomy, and Field Fortification, but to add facilities for the study of Languages, Chemistry, including Metallurgy, Geology, Mineralogy, and Naval Tactics. The want of a knowledge of languages in the British Navy was signally illustrated on a somewhat recent occasion, when the French iron-clad fleet visited Spithead, and upon our Admiral signalling for all officers who could speak French to come on board the Flagship, only one officer in the Channel Fleet was able to respond to the summons. The want of a scientific knowledge of the principles of naval architecture has prevented of late many skilled seamen of the Royal Navy from contributing useful and practicable suggestions to the discussions on our ironclad ship-building. The Committee seem to have thought that it would not be practicable to make a year’s study in the Naval College in peace time compulsory for every sub-lieutenant, though distinguished officers, like Admiral Sir Alexander Milne, gave evidence in favor of it. But, apart from this abundant source for supplying students, it was anticipated that an extension of the education would attract a large increase of scholars; and on general grounds, quite distinct from the accommodation, one-half of the Committee, including the Director of Naval Education, were strongly in favor of establishing the College at Greenwich. Fortified by this concurrence of authority, we recommend again to the consideration of the Government the scheme of a Naval University as the best mode of repeopling that ancient and now vacant Hospital.

In the year 1870 the Admiralty appointed a committee on “the Higher Education of Naval Officers,” and directed them to consider whether it was desirable to limit the place of study to the College at Portsmouth, or whether the vacant buildings at Greenwich could be utilized for the purposes of education. The reported evidence of the Committee revealed a lamentable want of scientific knowledge in the naval profession. The witnesses were agreed in stating that few half-pay Officers had knowledge enough to study with advantage after the age of 30, and that few could, with advantage to the service and themselves, be spared to study before the age of 30. It was stated by the Mathematical Master that Commanders and Captains come to the College very badly prepared, and that “some come who are unable to work a decimal fraction.” They come, as the College is now organized, exclusively for scientific study, in which Mathematics are a necessity, and yet are destitute of the most elementary preparation. Of course there are a few brilliant exceptions, but the scientific attainments of the profession as a body appear to be deplorably low.

In preparing a scheme for the improvement of what is so modestly termed “the higher education” of Naval Officers, the Committee proposed to add to the voluntary subjects of study a considerable number of practical pursuits. They proposed, under the advice of the late Chief Constructor of the Navy, to add both a short and a long course in Naval Architecture, in which there is at present absolutely no instruction given to Naval Officers. Such an education was supplied between the years 1806 and 1821, but since the latter year it has been altogether ignored and discouraged. It would require considerable space for the exhibition of models, and no sufficient room exists for it in the present College in Portsmouth Dockyard. The Committee proposed to furnish instruction, as now, in Steam, Mathematics, Nautical Astronomy, and Field Fortification, but to add facilities for the study of Languages, Chemistry, including Metallurgy, Geology, Mineralogy, and Naval Tactics. The want of a knowledge of languages in the British Navy was signally illustrated on a somewhat recent occasion, when the French iron-clad fleet visited Spithead, and upon our Admiral signalling for all officers who could speak French to come on board the Flagship, only one officer in the Channel Fleet was able to respond to the summons. The want of a scientific knowledge of the principles of naval architecture has prevented of late many skilled seamen of the Royal Navy from contributing useful and practicable suggestions to the discussions on our ironclad ship-building. The Committee seem to have thought that it would not be practicable to make a year’s study in the Naval College in peace time compulsory for every sub-lieutenant, though distinguished officers, like Admiral Sir Alexander Milne, gave evidence in favor of it. But, apart from this abundant source for supplying students, it was anticipated that an extension of the education would attract a large increase of scholars; and on general grounds, quite distinct from the accommodation, one-half of the Committee, including the Director of Naval Education, were strongly in favor of establishing the College at Greenwich. Fortified by this concurrence of authority, we recommend again to the consideration of the Government the scheme of a Naval University as the best mode of repeopling that ancient and now vacant Hospital.

This “leader” of the Times was followed in the issue for Sept. 20, by a communication from the eminent ship-builder E. J. Reed, who was for several years at the head of the Department of Naval Construction—with reasons for immediately widening and raising the education of naval officers of all classes.

The absence of everything like a comprehensive organization for impartingto them the knowledge necessary in these days is truly deplorable, and is made the more so by the very fact that our officers are themselves well aware of the extreme defectiveness of their training in many branches of knowledge which would be most valuable to them, and exhibit the strongest desire to supplement that training by every available means. I have had many occasions of observing this during the last few years; not the least striking of them being the publication of my book onShipbuilding in Iron and Steel, which, although a purely technical and professional book, was eagerly procured and studied by a very large number of naval officers, who, as you justly state, are now left absolutely without any official instruction in naval architecture. When in Russia this year I found elaborate means and appliances for instructing young officers in all the great features of practical shipbuilding, as well as in the general principles of naval design, and I had the opportunity of examining a large model of an iron-clad ship which was being constructed by these young naval officers; while the shipbuilding and engineering officers of the Russian service have one entire side of the vast building which accommodates the Admiralty branches, wholly devoted to their instruction. I have not yet seen the naval training schools of Germany, but I have had several opportunities of conferring on shipbuilding questions with the naval officers of that country, and I can state with perfect confidence that they possess a most intimate acquaintance with even the latest methods of naval design and construction, and obviously have had a careful training in the principles of naval architecture and the details of shipbuilding. How much this training contributes to the efficiency of naval commanders and other officers I need not say.

Mr. Reed dwells on the total absence of even an attempt to instruct naval officers of all ranks in the department of construction.

Even our warrant officers, the “carpenters” of the Navy, whose duty it is to keep our Navy in repair at sea, and to take instant measures for saving our ships from the effects of injuries sustained by collisions, groundings, or during action—even these officers are subjected to no special and organized training whatever, and are often put on board ship, in responsible charge of the repairing staff, without any knowledge whatever of the construction of their vessel.I knew so well that the whole class of naval “carpenters” have for years been anxious to obtain a better training for their very responsible duty, that I made a vigorous effort to be allowed to organize a system by which every carpenter of the service should be carefully instructed in iron shipbuilding, and as carefully selected for particular ships on account of his fitness for the duty; but some tradition about warrant officers being “executive officers,” and therefore not under the Chief Constructor of the Navy, and also, I fear, some jealousy of the patronage of such appointments passing into new hands, effectually barred my progress, and imposed conditions under which it was not possible to give effect to my wishes.I do not think I shall go beyond the truth if I say that other warrant officers are as deficient of suitable training as carpenters. I have certainly known of more than one instance in which the machinery by which our great modern guns are worked at sea has been so imperfectly understood that the “breaks” which are intended to control them have been “greased;” and no doubt a war woulddevelopesad consequences of the enforced ignorance of our gunners.But let it not be supposed that I advocate the instruction of warrant officers alone in the principles and practice of shipbuilding; it is in my judgment pressingly desirable that the whole class of executive officers should be afforded a certain amount of training in these subjects, and a far ampler training than they now receive in many other subjects also. The Navy suffers very much, even in peace times, from the want of a more liberal training on the part of its officers, as they themselves well know; and I am thoroughly persuaded that in a time of war we shall have to make great sacrifices on account of our neglect in this respect. Many unwise things are done, and many unwise reports are written, because of the want of fuller scientific and technical information on the part of naval officers; and I do not hesitate to say that during my tenure of the Chief Constructorship serious evils arose in my own department from the outside pressure of the uninformed.

I knew so well that the whole class of naval “carpenters” have for years been anxious to obtain a better training for their very responsible duty, that I made a vigorous effort to be allowed to organize a system by which every carpenter of the service should be carefully instructed in iron shipbuilding, and as carefully selected for particular ships on account of his fitness for the duty; but some tradition about warrant officers being “executive officers,” and therefore not under the Chief Constructor of the Navy, and also, I fear, some jealousy of the patronage of such appointments passing into new hands, effectually barred my progress, and imposed conditions under which it was not possible to give effect to my wishes.

I do not think I shall go beyond the truth if I say that other warrant officers are as deficient of suitable training as carpenters. I have certainly known of more than one instance in which the machinery by which our great modern guns are worked at sea has been so imperfectly understood that the “breaks” which are intended to control them have been “greased;” and no doubt a war woulddevelopesad consequences of the enforced ignorance of our gunners.

But let it not be supposed that I advocate the instruction of warrant officers alone in the principles and practice of shipbuilding; it is in my judgment pressingly desirable that the whole class of executive officers should be afforded a certain amount of training in these subjects, and a far ampler training than they now receive in many other subjects also. The Navy suffers very much, even in peace times, from the want of a more liberal training on the part of its officers, as they themselves well know; and I am thoroughly persuaded that in a time of war we shall have to make great sacrifices on account of our neglect in this respect. Many unwise things are done, and many unwise reports are written, because of the want of fuller scientific and technical information on the part of naval officers; and I do not hesitate to say that during my tenure of the Chief Constructorship serious evils arose in my own department from the outside pressure of the uninformed.

Mr. Reed would locate the Naval University at Greenwich.

Such a University must almost of a necessity be metropolitan. All the provincial Government Schools of Naval Architecture in this country have failed, and always must fail, because the metropolis alone can supply the necessary professors for class education chiefly of a scientific character; and the same is even more true of the present case. All the civil members of the late Admiralty Committee on the higher education of naval officers concurred in this view, none more strongly, I believe, than the present Director of Admiralty Education, Dr. Joseph Woolley, who is undoubtedly at once the most experienced and most enlightened authority alive as regards all questions of naval training. And there is this very strong further reason for making this University metropolitan—viz., that one of the most fruitful and valuable results to be anticipated from a more liberal and enlarged education of our naval officers is the release of the service from those thousand and one Old World prejudices which cramp the action and spirit of the service in these modern days, when other nations are bringing their most free and cultivated minds to bear upon naval warfare; and to found a University in a port where the present traditions and habits of thought of the service have the greatest force, would be to place a fatal stumbling block at the very threshold of the work; and if the metropolis is to be the home of the University there can not be a doubt about the superior eligibility of Greenwich. There the magnificent college already stands, with its empty halls, inviting the Government to devote them to some great national and naval object. It is within easy reach of London, professors and teachers; it is in the neighborhood of great shipbuilding and marine engine-making establishments, and also of Chatham Dockyard. It is on the banks of our noblest river, and on the verge of the open country, so that every form of healthful recreation would be available for the students. It also affords ample internal space for all those laboratories, model rooms, lecture rooms, and other apartments, which could only be secured on a sufficient scale at a seaport by a large outlay of money. And, above all, it affords the readiest, as well as the best, means of entering upon a much too long-neglected undertaking.

In the same issue (Sept. 20), the Times had a leader on the subject, from which we take a few paragraphs.

It is certainly discouraging for a nation which has hitherto held, and which means to keep, the first place in the world as a naval Power to find that in systematic training Russia and Germany are dangerously surpassing us. No doubt in the raw material of a navy we can compete fearlessly with any country on the face of the earth; our sailors can not be matched for enterprise, resolution, and discipline, nor can our captains, in spite of some late disasters, be out-sailed or out-manœuvred by any who sail under foreign flags. But we must not forget that war on the seas, like war on land, is year by year becoming more and more a scientific pursuit. Our magnificent iron-clad fleet, in which Mr. Reed feels justly a parental interest, is too precious a possession to be intrusted to men who do not know how to use so two-edged an instrument. But how should our naval officers know how to manage an iron-clad ship? They are taught nothing about the construction of these triumphs of modern science; they do not, as a rule, possess even the elementary knowledge which would enable them to commence the study of the subject.Whether the unequaled advantages offered by Greenwich Hospital be turned to account or some more expensive method be adopted by a Government which pins its credit on economy, the necessity of providing for the education of naval officers can no longer be ignored. Not to speak of the absolute absurdity of sending iron-clads to sea in charge of officers who know no more of the construction of an iron-clad than they know of the latest improvements in cotton-spinning machinery, it is obvious that a system under which men whose business is to navigate costly vessels of war, are sent to their work without knowing even the elements of mathematics, must sooner or later result in a disastrous collapse. It may be a question whether such has not been the case already,—whether the recent mischances in the conduct at sea of some of our finest vessels may not be traceable to the imperfect education of the officers.When other nations are giving their sailors scientific teaching, and when we are expending gigantic sums on the construction of a Navy which must be handled in accordance with scientific principles, it appears absurd, or worse, to allow the commanders and the officers of our iron-clads to go to sea without the slightest guarantee for their knowledge of the peculiar conditions under which one of our modern monster ships is to be managed. If an iron-clad happens, as we may presume, considering what has lately happened, is not impossible, to strike upon a rock or otherwise seriously to damage herself at a distance from home dockyards, the chances are that no one on board, from the captain down to the carpenter, will know how to repair the damage.

Whether the unequaled advantages offered by Greenwich Hospital be turned to account or some more expensive method be adopted by a Government which pins its credit on economy, the necessity of providing for the education of naval officers can no longer be ignored. Not to speak of the absolute absurdity of sending iron-clads to sea in charge of officers who know no more of the construction of an iron-clad than they know of the latest improvements in cotton-spinning machinery, it is obvious that a system under which men whose business is to navigate costly vessels of war, are sent to their work without knowing even the elements of mathematics, must sooner or later result in a disastrous collapse. It may be a question whether such has not been the case already,—whether the recent mischances in the conduct at sea of some of our finest vessels may not be traceable to the imperfect education of the officers.

When other nations are giving their sailors scientific teaching, and when we are expending gigantic sums on the construction of a Navy which must be handled in accordance with scientific principles, it appears absurd, or worse, to allow the commanders and the officers of our iron-clads to go to sea without the slightest guarantee for their knowledge of the peculiar conditions under which one of our modern monster ships is to be managed. If an iron-clad happens, as we may presume, considering what has lately happened, is not impossible, to strike upon a rock or otherwise seriously to damage herself at a distance from home dockyards, the chances are that no one on board, from the captain down to the carpenter, will know how to repair the damage.

To the urgent demand for more scientific knowledge of naval construction, Admiral Henry J. Rouse interposes a plea for more seamanship, discipline, and education afloat. In the Times for Sept. 28, the bluff Admiral says, rather bluntly:

I was alive to the want of seamanship and to the neglect of a naval education from the moment a midshipman left his school and was appointed to a steamer: but I always flattered myself there was one redeeming point—namely—gunnery—in which the officers of the present day had a wonderful preëminence over the old school. How is the proposed college to ameliorate this state of things? Will it make the young officers engineers when on board ship? They are not allowed to interfere with the engineer, who is, in fact, the commanding officer. Will warrant officers, carpenters, and gunners, be educated there? And in answer to Mr. Reed relying upon the carpenter in the event of a ship grounding (not an uncommon occurrence), we look to the captain to lay out his anchors, lighten his ship and heave her off by purchase over purchase; we do not consult the carpenter. Mr. Reed says,—“The men who will have to design for our Navy will never be free to design the best ships which can be provided until an improved education of the whole naval service unbinds the hands of thescientific servantsof the Admiralty.”Who are the scientific servants? Are the men who designed the iron-bound monsters at the expense of half a million each; which have every bad quality, which can neither sail, wear, nor stay better than a coal barge, and which roll and pitch like maniacs owing to the weight of their armor, and which are certain to founder if called upon to face a very heavy gale? Are the servants scientific who stow their ballast on empty cells, thereby preventing a ship righting herself if she heels over 33 deg. under canvas, and which makes her capsize keel uppermost, according to the simple law of gravitation which impels the vacuum to the surface? Was the servant scientific who reduced a ship’s ballast 300 tons, and put a corresponding weight of iron on the upper works, boasting he had retained the same line of immersion without calculating the loss of stability, and did not the Admiralty listen to him like countrymen to a mountebank, and reward him with a grant of money?If a Greenwich College could diminish the frightful excesses and expenditure in the last eight years in the building department, for which the House of Commons demanded an investigation, which was checkmated by sending a distinguished admiral to the Cape of Good Hope; if it could instruct the scientific servants in the mysteries of their vocation, and convert the simple landsmen in Charing-cross into naval oracles; if it could make young officers seamen by inspiration, then I should agree with Mr. Reed that a Greenwich College would be most desirable.As for the junior officers nothing but a sailing ship can educate a seaman. If a midshipman loses the precious years from 14 to 17 in a steamer he will be too old and proud to learn his profession, and when later in life he is sent to take command of a prize ship under canvas in war time he will look very foolish in half a gale of wind.If any man will take the trouble to think, he must be convinced that no ship of any size, no armorclypei septemplicis, no guns of 25 tons can compete with an iron-cased steam ram of about 1,200 tons, invulnerable, bomb-proof, which would put five feet of cold steel under a ship’s water line going 14 miles per hour. We are now building gunboats to protect the coast. One of Mr. Drake’s steam rams of about 300 tons, without a gun mounted, would destroy a dozenof them. In the next naval action history will be repeated. Romans, Carthagenians, and again thenaves rostratæ, aliasthe Steam Ram, will carry the day. It is wonderful that the Admiralty for the last twenty years have been building their hogs in armor to defy shot and shell, ignoring the terrible attack of this superior power. It is never too late to mend. To save enormous sums of money and a waste of coal we ought to pay off all our useless monsters, and during peace to commission small ships with auxiliary screws, never to burn a coal except in a case of necessity; and then, by keeping squadrons at sea, we might improve our discipline, our seamanship, andesprit de corps.

Who are the scientific servants? Are the men who designed the iron-bound monsters at the expense of half a million each; which have every bad quality, which can neither sail, wear, nor stay better than a coal barge, and which roll and pitch like maniacs owing to the weight of their armor, and which are certain to founder if called upon to face a very heavy gale? Are the servants scientific who stow their ballast on empty cells, thereby preventing a ship righting herself if she heels over 33 deg. under canvas, and which makes her capsize keel uppermost, according to the simple law of gravitation which impels the vacuum to the surface? Was the servant scientific who reduced a ship’s ballast 300 tons, and put a corresponding weight of iron on the upper works, boasting he had retained the same line of immersion without calculating the loss of stability, and did not the Admiralty listen to him like countrymen to a mountebank, and reward him with a grant of money?

If a Greenwich College could diminish the frightful excesses and expenditure in the last eight years in the building department, for which the House of Commons demanded an investigation, which was checkmated by sending a distinguished admiral to the Cape of Good Hope; if it could instruct the scientific servants in the mysteries of their vocation, and convert the simple landsmen in Charing-cross into naval oracles; if it could make young officers seamen by inspiration, then I should agree with Mr. Reed that a Greenwich College would be most desirable.

As for the junior officers nothing but a sailing ship can educate a seaman. If a midshipman loses the precious years from 14 to 17 in a steamer he will be too old and proud to learn his profession, and when later in life he is sent to take command of a prize ship under canvas in war time he will look very foolish in half a gale of wind.

If any man will take the trouble to think, he must be convinced that no ship of any size, no armorclypei septemplicis, no guns of 25 tons can compete with an iron-cased steam ram of about 1,200 tons, invulnerable, bomb-proof, which would put five feet of cold steel under a ship’s water line going 14 miles per hour. We are now building gunboats to protect the coast. One of Mr. Drake’s steam rams of about 300 tons, without a gun mounted, would destroy a dozenof them. In the next naval action history will be repeated. Romans, Carthagenians, and again thenaves rostratæ, aliasthe Steam Ram, will carry the day. It is wonderful that the Admiralty for the last twenty years have been building their hogs in armor to defy shot and shell, ignoring the terrible attack of this superior power. It is never too late to mend. To save enormous sums of money and a waste of coal we ought to pay off all our useless monsters, and during peace to commission small ships with auxiliary screws, never to burn a coal except in a case of necessity; and then, by keeping squadrons at sea, we might improve our discipline, our seamanship, andesprit de corps.

The letter of Admiral Rouse was accompanied by a leader in the Times of the same date from which we take a few paragraphs.

The spirit of an English sailor of the old school, with his bluff, outspoken, uncompromising detestation of change, and his unfaltering belief that all that has been was right, is something to wonder at and even admire, if we should not care to imitate it, in these days of perpetual motion. He has observed, as we all have, with shame and misgiving, that while the cost of our vast ironclad vessels of war is growing yearly greater, the officers of the new generation who are to be intrusted with the handling of these expensive monsters are not comparable for practical skill and shiftiness with those of Admiral Rouse’s contemporaries who dominated the seas in sailing frigates in the days before either steam or ship-armor was devised. In his perception of the defects of our present system the Admiral does not stand alone; it is condemned by the ablest officers who are now in command of our fleets, by the eminent engineers who construct them—unfortunately, with still more eloquent urgency by the voice of our recent naval annals. The misadventures of the Captain, the Psyche, and the Agincourt, not to mention less serious mishaps, have startled us all, and the seamanship of the British Navy has come to be gravely questioned.

Let us compare Admiral Rouse’s remedy with Mr. Reed’s.

The latter is dwelling on the custom of sending young boys to sea with necessarily imperfect training, and of promoting them to the higher grades, though in the meantime they have had no opportunities of scientific instruction. He asserts the consequence is that very few of the officers who command our costly iron-clads at the present day know any thing of the construction or the qualities of those gigantic boating masses. Admiral Rouse admits this fully, but he superadds a charge at least as serious; he alleges that few or none of our modern naval officers who spend the years of their apprenticeship to the sea on board a steamer, and who “worship the boiler whenever they are in a scrape,” do know or can know any thing of real seamanship. Mr. Reed says that the study of the principles of shipbuilding is unknown among the officers of our Navy, and that accordingly, few of them can handle an iron-clad. Admiral Rouse says that the study of the winds and waves is neglected by them, and that not many of them can sail a frigate. Mr. Reed demands a Naval University to teach officers the theory of navigation as applied to the vast masses of iron now afloat under our flag. Admiral Rouse would get rid of these “useless monsters” altogether, would, during peace, commission small “ships with auxiliary screws,” and “never burn a coal except in case of necessity.” Here we have the ancient and the modern spirit in contrast and juxtaposition. The former, obstinate and often illogical, but with a certain rude and not unjustified faith in practice, deserves our respect, for it was this spirit which won us, in old times, our naval supremacy. The latter may be over-bold and presumptuously contemptuous of the past and all its belongings; but it is the spirit of progress, and on its guidance we have to depend for the maintenance of the renown we achieved in the earlier and darker time.

On the 20th of March, 1871, Capt. James G. Goodenough, R. N., read a paper before the Royal United Service Institute, on the Preliminary Education of Naval Officers, from which we make extracts.

I should be guilty of an absurd and forced indifference to what is passing around me if I were not to say that an impression now exists very generally in the service, that the views which finds most favor with regard to the trainingof the officers of Her Majesty’s Navy is, that the naval officer should be taught young; that he should be made to devote himself to the details, and nothing but details of his profession from boyhood to youth, and from youth to middle age, and that somewhere behind middle age and old age, he should be deemed to be warrant, and be thrown away a pensioner on the country’s gratitude, unfit even to have a voice in the guidance of the affairs of the service to which he may have been an ornament. This impression is doing much harm in all directions.It is weakening the desire for knowledge and self-improvement in naval officers; it is tending to narrow and circumscribe the idea of responsibility of a naval commander for all things coming within his ken, and to lower his conception of his own position from that of a representative of his country in all parts of the world, an agent of her policy, and a guardian of her commerce, to that of being a mere executing tool, whose only argument is force.The warning which I should give, and it contains the whole case, is this,—that while all other circumstances of life at sea have changed considerably in the last thirty years, the preliminary training of our officers has not changed in its main features. It is not merely that our material, whether in ships or guns, steamships or canvas, has changed. It is not only that our material has become far more complicated than of yore. If that alone were the case, the system of a former age might supplant the wants of the day. No! the change whose bearing we have failed to acknowledge, even though we may have perceived it, is this, that while formerly the conduct of ships at sea, their discipline, and the handling of their material generally, was based on the experience obtained in the practical individual lives from early years, and on an acquaintance with external phenomena and internal details, which were not reduced to laws or elevated into systems; now, we do possess rules and laws, which greatly reduce the value, if they do not quite supersede, the practical experience of a single life. In every one of the varied practical duties of a sea officer, this is the case, whether in navigation or in discipline, in artillery or in manœuvring; and I say that this constitutes the great change in a sea life to which we have made no corresponding advance. I say that although those laws and systems exist, we still continue to let the details which they include be painfully and only practically acquired by experience, instead of methodically teaching the principles on which they are based.The principles on which I consider that that education should rest are these:First, that a distinction should be made between the period of education and that of special training.Second, that special training should be the business of the Government, while education should be left to the care of the parents, at the ordinary schools of the country.Third, that the handling of ships’ sails and boats, and the principles of command should be methodically taught, instead of, as at present, being left to chance observations and the accidents of service.Fourth, that the young officers under training in schoolships should have no command, except over each other, and should count no sea time; and that on entering the service afloat in sea-going ships, they should become at once, in some measure, responsible officers, though liable to future examinations, and to produce evidence of having done work after leaving the training-ships.Fifth, that in order to discourage cramming, all entrance examinations should be confined, as far as possible, to the subject of study at advanced public schools, and that every candidate should be required to bring with him certificates of a year’s good conduct from his last school.I wish to see a distinction made between the education and the special training of naval officers. I do not pretend to give the precise age at which this distinction should be made. It will necessarily differ with different boys, and I would therefore have a two years’ limit to the age of entry instead of one. My opinion is, that special training should begin at from 14 to 16, and that it should be continued from that age for three years; that is, from an average of 15 to an average of 18 in the college and sea-going training ships.I should wish young officers to proceed thence to the ordinary service afloat, and after two years’ service in a sea-going ship to be admitted to pass an examination for lieutenants.The examination for entry, which under the system I propose, would be at the average age of 15, should take place in November of each year, and shouldbe arranged, as far as possible, so as to comprise subjects which do not require special cramming, but are taught generally in our public schools, omitting some, such as Greek, of which no further use or notice would be made in their future career, and substituting French, or another modern language in lieu.The college would then open for the cadets on the 1st of February,andwhile indoor studies of navigation, nautical astronomy and modern languages occupied the mornings, the afternoons should be devoted to practical seamanship until the first of May, when they should embark in a corvette, especially set apart for their instruction, until August.During these four months they should perform every practical duty of their profession with their own hands, under instruction, with plenty of time, and with patient, steady instructors, and at the end of their cruise, after an inspection by the governor of the college, they should strip and clear their vessel before proceeding on a summer holiday.During the cruise they should not only learn to take and work their own observations for the position of the ship by the ordinary known methods, but should also study the pilotage of the coast of England, whenever visited.After the vacation they should again rig their vessel, and until the end of October should have instruction in rigging, masting, and so on, while the weather permitted, as well as continuing to exercise in boats. November and December being devoted to indoor studies and examination. This would complete the first year of training.The second year would begin as the first, with indoor studies in the morning, the advanced seamanship class of the afternoon, alternating with gunnery instruction classes until May, when the second class would embark in a steam corvette, and in addition to the study of seamanship, as in the first year, would join that of steam machinery. While the cruise of the first year would have been on board a sailing corvette, and on the south coast of England generally, that of the second year should have been extended to the coasts of the United Kingdom and western coast of Europe; and while the sailing corvette should be manned by steady old seamen, and no attempt should be made at quickness of manœuvre, the steam corvette for the second year should be manned by active young trained able seamen, and all manœuvres should be performed together, as in actual practice in man-of-war, the young cadets under training working a mast.At the end of this cruise, they would not only strip their vessel, but would also take to pieces the principal parts of the machinery, before the summer holidays and after inspection.On recommencement of term in October, indoor studies should again be taken up, and the final examination for the rank of midshipmen should take place in December, the average age of the young officers being now 17 years.I should now reassemble the midshipmen on February 1st, either on board the gunnery ships or in a special ship attached to the college, for a three months’ course in practical gunnery, after being examined in which, they should be discharged into a full-rigged, full-manned frigate for final instruction in the duties of an officer, under selected captains, commanders, and lieutenants. They should here alternately take the duties of officers of tops, officers of boats, officers in charge of a particular mast, and in rotation as officers of the watch, under the care and guidance of a lieutenant of each watch, while lectures and exercise in manœuvres of ships and boats, of heavy and field guns, of small-arm drills and landing parties, should be systematically taught them. At the end of this cruise, which should extend to the Mediterranean, an examination in seamanship should take place, and the midshipmen would be discharged into the service afloat, at an average age of 18 years, where they would serve as midshipmen for one year before examination (as now) for sub-lieutenants.Thus, the whole course of training would be two years at college, and in training corvettes as cadets, and one year’s training in practical gunnery, and instruction as an officer in various duties, with the rank of midshipman performing all the duties of a subordinate officer, at the conclusion of which an examination should take place in all the subjects of the profession, whether at home or abroad. This preliminary education should be followed by the modification of the navigating class, the creation of an examination for the rank of lieutenant, and other changes in rank.

It is weakening the desire for knowledge and self-improvement in naval officers; it is tending to narrow and circumscribe the idea of responsibility of a naval commander for all things coming within his ken, and to lower his conception of his own position from that of a representative of his country in all parts of the world, an agent of her policy, and a guardian of her commerce, to that of being a mere executing tool, whose only argument is force.

The warning which I should give, and it contains the whole case, is this,—that while all other circumstances of life at sea have changed considerably in the last thirty years, the preliminary training of our officers has not changed in its main features. It is not merely that our material, whether in ships or guns, steamships or canvas, has changed. It is not only that our material has become far more complicated than of yore. If that alone were the case, the system of a former age might supplant the wants of the day. No! the change whose bearing we have failed to acknowledge, even though we may have perceived it, is this, that while formerly the conduct of ships at sea, their discipline, and the handling of their material generally, was based on the experience obtained in the practical individual lives from early years, and on an acquaintance with external phenomena and internal details, which were not reduced to laws or elevated into systems; now, we do possess rules and laws, which greatly reduce the value, if they do not quite supersede, the practical experience of a single life. In every one of the varied practical duties of a sea officer, this is the case, whether in navigation or in discipline, in artillery or in manœuvring; and I say that this constitutes the great change in a sea life to which we have made no corresponding advance. I say that although those laws and systems exist, we still continue to let the details which they include be painfully and only practically acquired by experience, instead of methodically teaching the principles on which they are based.

The principles on which I consider that that education should rest are these:First, that a distinction should be made between the period of education and that of special training.Second, that special training should be the business of the Government, while education should be left to the care of the parents, at the ordinary schools of the country.Third, that the handling of ships’ sails and boats, and the principles of command should be methodically taught, instead of, as at present, being left to chance observations and the accidents of service.Fourth, that the young officers under training in schoolships should have no command, except over each other, and should count no sea time; and that on entering the service afloat in sea-going ships, they should become at once, in some measure, responsible officers, though liable to future examinations, and to produce evidence of having done work after leaving the training-ships.Fifth, that in order to discourage cramming, all entrance examinations should be confined, as far as possible, to the subject of study at advanced public schools, and that every candidate should be required to bring with him certificates of a year’s good conduct from his last school.

I wish to see a distinction made between the education and the special training of naval officers. I do not pretend to give the precise age at which this distinction should be made. It will necessarily differ with different boys, and I would therefore have a two years’ limit to the age of entry instead of one. My opinion is, that special training should begin at from 14 to 16, and that it should be continued from that age for three years; that is, from an average of 15 to an average of 18 in the college and sea-going training ships.

I should wish young officers to proceed thence to the ordinary service afloat, and after two years’ service in a sea-going ship to be admitted to pass an examination for lieutenants.

The examination for entry, which under the system I propose, would be at the average age of 15, should take place in November of each year, and shouldbe arranged, as far as possible, so as to comprise subjects which do not require special cramming, but are taught generally in our public schools, omitting some, such as Greek, of which no further use or notice would be made in their future career, and substituting French, or another modern language in lieu.

The college would then open for the cadets on the 1st of February,andwhile indoor studies of navigation, nautical astronomy and modern languages occupied the mornings, the afternoons should be devoted to practical seamanship until the first of May, when they should embark in a corvette, especially set apart for their instruction, until August.

During these four months they should perform every practical duty of their profession with their own hands, under instruction, with plenty of time, and with patient, steady instructors, and at the end of their cruise, after an inspection by the governor of the college, they should strip and clear their vessel before proceeding on a summer holiday.

During the cruise they should not only learn to take and work their own observations for the position of the ship by the ordinary known methods, but should also study the pilotage of the coast of England, whenever visited.

After the vacation they should again rig their vessel, and until the end of October should have instruction in rigging, masting, and so on, while the weather permitted, as well as continuing to exercise in boats. November and December being devoted to indoor studies and examination. This would complete the first year of training.

The second year would begin as the first, with indoor studies in the morning, the advanced seamanship class of the afternoon, alternating with gunnery instruction classes until May, when the second class would embark in a steam corvette, and in addition to the study of seamanship, as in the first year, would join that of steam machinery. While the cruise of the first year would have been on board a sailing corvette, and on the south coast of England generally, that of the second year should have been extended to the coasts of the United Kingdom and western coast of Europe; and while the sailing corvette should be manned by steady old seamen, and no attempt should be made at quickness of manœuvre, the steam corvette for the second year should be manned by active young trained able seamen, and all manœuvres should be performed together, as in actual practice in man-of-war, the young cadets under training working a mast.

At the end of this cruise, they would not only strip their vessel, but would also take to pieces the principal parts of the machinery, before the summer holidays and after inspection.

On recommencement of term in October, indoor studies should again be taken up, and the final examination for the rank of midshipmen should take place in December, the average age of the young officers being now 17 years.

I should now reassemble the midshipmen on February 1st, either on board the gunnery ships or in a special ship attached to the college, for a three months’ course in practical gunnery, after being examined in which, they should be discharged into a full-rigged, full-manned frigate for final instruction in the duties of an officer, under selected captains, commanders, and lieutenants. They should here alternately take the duties of officers of tops, officers of boats, officers in charge of a particular mast, and in rotation as officers of the watch, under the care and guidance of a lieutenant of each watch, while lectures and exercise in manœuvres of ships and boats, of heavy and field guns, of small-arm drills and landing parties, should be systematically taught them. At the end of this cruise, which should extend to the Mediterranean, an examination in seamanship should take place, and the midshipmen would be discharged into the service afloat, at an average age of 18 years, where they would serve as midshipmen for one year before examination (as now) for sub-lieutenants.

Thus, the whole course of training would be two years at college, and in training corvettes as cadets, and one year’s training in practical gunnery, and instruction as an officer in various duties, with the rank of midshipman performing all the duties of a subordinate officer, at the conclusion of which an examination should take place in all the subjects of the profession, whether at home or abroad. This preliminary education should be followed by the modification of the navigating class, the creation of an examination for the rank of lieutenant, and other changes in rank.

Back to Index Next