guns and the same number of 80-ton guns, including the carriages on which they are mounted, does not exceed 200 or 300 tons, it is in the ammunition that a heavier armament makes so much difference. We had arrived at projectiles weighing nearly a ton each, with a charge of some hundreds of pounds of powder. To provide, therefore, say a hundred rounds for each gun, or even a smaller number, involved a great addition of weight. Hence the dimensions of the 'Inflexible' and her equipment increased the displacement to 11,600 tons—the largest warship we had constructed. The design was not to pass unchallenged. Grave doubts were expressed by a high authority as to the wisdom of leaving the ends unprotected, and as to the stability of the vessel when these had been subjected to a heavy shell fire. The extremities were guarded only by an armoured deck 3 in. thick just below the water line, and at the sides by spaces filled with cork, to give buoyancy when this part was perforated by shot and water gained admittance. A committee, however, of distinguished men appointed to investigate the design did not consider that the ship would be specially liable to such a disaster. The question really hinged upon the amount of fire a ship is likely to receive in action in any particular part, and experience teaches us that, under such conditions, no one portion is more liable than another. The 'Inflexible,' therefore, was completed, and in 1882 assisted in the bombardment of the Egyptian forts with the 'Alexandra,' each representing a system and its development in twenty years. A brief review of this
