4
said the French papers—will never be satisfactorily settled till France has a navy of which England is afraid. A recent inquiry had discomfited all the critics and demonstrated that the French fleet had never been in such an efficient condition. Moreover, the people were convinced not only that the appliances of modern naval warfare tended to equalise the combatants, while the torpedo would give additional chances to the country which had developed it to the highest degree, but that their past defeats were mainly due to the terrible disorganisation of their Navy which the Revolution of 1789 brought about. This had been lost sight of in England, or rather it had not been put forward in any naval history until an American writer had shown under what disadvantages in this respect the French fought at sea in the old wars. Experienced commanders were ruthlessly dismissed, or fled to escape the guillotine, while their places were taken by inexperienced adherents of the Republic. To what other result than that which followed could such a procedure lead?
To my mind, seeing how much depends upon the traditions and discipline of centuries in the efficiency of a fleet being preserved unbroken, the marvel is not that the English were able to sweep the seas, but that the disorganised Navy of France should have made so gallant a stand under such disadvantageous circumstances. There was much justification, therefore, in assuming that this
