Admiral Sir Percy Soot some time ago, wi going against the continuance of the policy of big ships, said that, given a number of dashing young officers, he would undertake to break the boom of any harbour and torpedo the vessels taking refuge there. Tersely summed up, he expressed the opinion that submarines and destroyers could achieve terrible destruction practically anywhere and that battle cruisers could be so attacked that they would never be able to use their power. In the little sea-fighting reported in the precent war, Bir Percy Scott's theories have been supported in some instances and As to the latter, the Battle of Heligoland saw the battle cruiser Lion firing with irresistible accuracy, while steaming at a high rate of speed and evading the enemy's torpedoes. But the sinking of cruisors—that they were old does not affect the argument—shows how vulnerable a man-of-war is to the modern torpedo, which strikes her low down. Then again we have the case of the British submarine that entered Wilhelmshaven, fired her torpedoes, evaded the enemy's drag-nets and later rose place of safety. This submarine had crossed an extensive mine field and other obstructions. Mines were equally inefficacious in case of the German submarine that sank the cruiser Hermes in the Straite of Dover. Thus it is still impossible to dogmatize; successes in all field will be met by new engines of destruction, and therefore if mines are to be laid to stop submarines, we may expect the evolution of a mine that will explode downwards when its anchor chain is touched.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.