HL Deb 04 July 1864 vol 176 cc685-6
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE

rose to call the attention of the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Somerset) to the recent engagement between the Kearsarge and the Alabama, and asked if the attention of the Government had been called to the defence of the Kearsarge by means of chain-armour, and its power of resisting shot; and, further, if the Government had in the numerous experiments it had made, tested the value as a means of defence of ships of war of chain-armour? This was not the first time they had heard of chain armour being used in this way, for in 1862, Mr. Rowan, of Belfast, addressed a long letter to Lord Palmerston on the subject, which he would not read to the House, but would hand to the noble Duke.

THE DUKE OF SOMERSET

said, the defence afforded by the chain-plating to the Kearsarge must have been very small, for it only extended over a space about thirty-six feet in length, and the chain was of the kind known as 1¾ inch. In order to judge of the strength of any armour it was necessary that the shots should strike it. Wow the firing from the Alabama could not have been good, for this strip of armouring was only struck twice during the engagement; one of the shots glanced off, and the other, which was the only one that hit the armour fairly, pierced it and lodged in the side of the vessel. At the same time, it was known that the Alabama entered upon the contest under great disadvantages, her powder being either damp or very bad, and the vessel herself in a very unfit state. Two or three years ago the Admiralty made some experiments with chain-armour, and the result was that with a common 68-pounder and east-iron shot it was knocked all to pieces—so that against steel projectiles it would afford no defence whatever. It did not at all follow that, as a make-shift, it would not be better than nothing, and at long distances, as in this case, it had some advantages. But what the Admiralty had to decide was—Given a certain weight, how to apply it most effectively for the defence of a ship? Some time ago the noble Earl opposite expressed a doubt whether guns weighing 6½ tons each would not be found too heavy for broadside purposes. He had since been informed that the two 11-inch guns on board the Kearsarge, one before and the other abaft the mainmast, weighed each 7¾ tons. The real conclusions to be drawn from the conflict between the Kearsarge and Alabama were that very powerful guns and very speedy vessels were required. The speed of the Kearsarge gave her great superiority over the Alabama, which, moreover, was not built for fighting purposes, but mainly with a view to cruising. Experiments had shown conclusively that the continuous surface of armour-plate yielded great advantages over interrupted surfaces like bar-iron or chain covering; no new information has been derived from the action between these two vessels.