Lubeck, yea, Genoa itself. But such who instead of their own servants use char-folke in their houses, shall find their work worse done, and yet pay dear for it. and L'Aigle, and some others, taken in the American war, were esteemed the finest specimens of the art, in existence. It is well known, that the Americans carried this principle still further: they Queen Elizabeth, sensible of this gave the denomination of Frigate to mischief, erected a navy royal (conti-vessels constructed with the strength nued and increased by her successors) and size of a seventy-four gun ship; of the best ships Europe ever beheld. they called that a forty-four gun FriIndeed, much is in the matter-the ex-gate, which in fact mounted fifty-two or cellency of our English Oak; more in fifty-four guns; and these ponderous the making, the cunning of our Ship-vessels when brought along side a Briwrights; most in the manning, the tish frigate of thirty-six guns proved courage of our seamen; and yet all [due] too powerful fortheir opponent; as well to God's blessing, who so often hath they might. Our pages have recorded crowned them with success." several instances of these misnomers, In this slight sketch the reader has with the true statement of the facts; seen the gradual increase of the vessels for, though no sensible American in size: the purposes of war demanded could be brought for a moment to doubt this and the constructions of other the energy and skill of the British, yet nations enforced the necessity of it. party would blindly insist, that a frigate But, the paper under consideration is is a frigate; and would display its capample authority for concluding that the tures, regardless of the disparity of dimensions of vessels were destined to force. This conduct of the Americans experience still futher enlargement. induced the British Admiralty, with eviFor this we are, in part, beholden to dent reluctance, to order the building the French, who built their 74 gun ships of a larger class of vessels, to be called larger than the 90 gun ships of the Frigates, in imitation of the American. British. This useful class of ships (the A much wiser step, if we may be al74's) after the improvements adopted, lowed to offer an opinion, is that before became favourite among our officers us: the reducing the rates of vessels to and seamen; and while smaller were their true and correct order; and rethought scarcely fit for the line of bat- porting them according to their real rates tle, the larger were condemned as un- and force. The British navy can lose manageable, unwieldy, or "huge car- nothing of that renown which it has racks.' It is true, moreover, that the so nobly obtained, by the truth being large ships of the French navy obliged known in every instance; and we humthe English to build equally large ships bly beg leave to insist, that in future to match them; and to say truth, our captures from the enemy, whenever smaller sixty-fours were wholly unequal such shall occur, the true number of to French first rates. Lord Rod- guns, with the true rate of the vessel ney, it is well known, trembled for the captured, be correctly reported, officifate of the Agamemnon (64) when ly-ally; so that a frigate be no longer ing alongside Le Comte De Grasse's known under that term, when her force huge ship, the Ville de Paris, in the is that of a sixty gun ship. line of battle; and expressed himself happy when the smoke allowed him to discover, after her share in the action, that she was still a-float. The same encrease of measurements took place in the frigates of the French navy; from having been vessels of twenty-four or twenty-eight guns, the French built frigates of forty-four guns, with the scantlings of sixty gun ships: When guns were first used in ships, they were firmly fixed down to the beams, or the deck, (indeed, they were used at land, on the same principle; huge posts being placed behind them, as a kind of bed, to prevent their recoil) they stood one on each side the main mast, for in the first instance only two were borne by the vessel. As larger vessels were built to receive them, their numbers were encreased; but, with extreme incaution they were neither PROPOSALS AND REGULATIONS RELATIVE TO THE ROYAL NAVY, MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY, AND SANCTIONED BY ORDER IN COUNCIL, matched in size, nor reduced to order, respecting their weight and dimensions. They were of all sorts, and all sizes, and all constructions. At length, it was found necessary to regulate this confusion: to ships of a certain magnitude so many, and of certain weights, It was to be expected, that in the natural were allowed; and the heavier placed lapse of time, and still more, in the course below the lighter. The invention of carro- of a war, unexampled in duration and extent, nades disturbed this economy; and now, several variations from the old establishit has become necessary to reckon these large pieces of ordnance among the ment and regulations of the Royal Navy guns of a vessel. At first, and for should have taken place; and however desome time after their introduction, it sirable, in the view either of economy or was uncertain whether this species of convenience, uniformity may be, it was imcannon would permanently obtain a possible during the pressure of war, either place in the navy, as there were various to resist the innovations which temporary difficulties in the manner of using them. circumstances rendered necessary, or to reThose have since been obviated by sub-mould and reform the whole system of the sequent improvements; and the use of carronades seems likely to be continued navy, on every occasion on which some alteration was introduced.. We therefore find that there have grown On the whole, we cannot but approve the intention of enforcing regulations up several inconsistencies, irregularities, more than ever necessary for distinc and departures from the establishments, in tion among a navy so numerous as that of Britain is now. It is no lon-particular articles of the naval service; ger that petty squadron which might and as we think this a favourable occasion be inspected with a single glance of for endeavouring to remedy the inconthe eye. It no longer is the “ poor venience which arises from these irregufleet of Queen Elizabeth, whence larities, and to reduce, as far as may be Purfleet on the Essex coast is said practicable, the several alterations which traditionally, to derive its name. It is have been made, into one regular system, an immense [concern, a vital department of the state; an arm of mighty we most humbly beg leave to submit to power, extending to all parts of the your Royal Highness's gracious consiworld. It is now, as well understood deration, the following observations and in China, as formerly it was in "the nar-propositions, on the rates, classification, row seas." It is respected on the and schemes of arming and manning His coasts of South America, as formerly it was in Europe. By what gradations it Majesty's ships; and on the pay, ratings, has acquired this magnitude and this and number of the officers, and warrant preponderance, we have no need to en- and petty and non-commissioned officers, of quire. To maintain this distinction is His Majesty's Navy and Royal Marines, now the duty, as it is the inclination, and the establishment of the companies of of the British nation, and its public Royal Marine Artillery. officers. What further steps are necessary to be taken for the purpose will 1. The postships of the Royal Navy are divided into six rates; besides which, engage our attention in a future article. there are the various classes of sloops, fireships, bombs, gun vessels, yachts, schooners and cutters. The following is the first part of the document, and refers to the classification of the ships. The division of the Royal Navy into six rates took place in the reign of King Charles the First, and at that period, and for several years afterwards, these rates included the whole navy. In the reign of King Charles the Second, the sloops, fire-ships, and yachts, became distinguished from the sixth rates. At the Revolution, the rates comprised nearly the same classes of ships which they now do, except that the sixth rate still included vessels of a less number of guns than twenty. In the year 1719, a general establishment for building was adopted, which however was not long adhered to. In 1783, a scheme of manning and armament, or gunning, as it was called, was proposed, but the latter was not adopted till the year 1742, and then only as applying to ships built since 1740. In 1742, the ships of 20 guns, of the sixth rate, were increased to 24 guns, and 160 men, and this became for the time the lowest class of post ships. On this establishment, it is to be ob served, that the 80 gun ships of the third rate were on three decks, and that the Board of Admiralty had suggested to the committee the expediency of substituting instead of this class, ships of 74 guns on two decks and a half, a proposition decidedly rejected by the committee. before a very striking instance was given, A short period only had however elapsed, both of the way in which innovations are produced, and of the impossibility of resisting them; for, on the 3d of February, 1747, the Board of Admiralty acquainted his Majesty, that "the French ship Invincible, lately captured, was found to be larger than his Majesty's ships of 90 guns and 750 men; and suggested that this ship and all other prizes of the like class, and also his Majesty's ships of 90 guns, when reduced to two decks and a half, and 74 In the year 1745, the Board of Admi- guns, should be allowed a compliment of ralty, observing that "no establishment or 700 men"; and, in 1748, the Board repreregulation for building ships had been sented to the King in Council, that the made since the year 1719, which had been ships built according to the representations long discontinued; that instead thereof of the committee had not auswered their ships had been built according to particu- expectations, and they therefore prayed lar schemes and proportions, without any his Majesty's sanction for departing, in new standard or uniformity; those of the same ships about to be built, from the forms and rate being often of unequal dimensions, so models so lately established. This was that the stores and furniture of one would granted, but not till the Board had been not suit another of the same class,—a mat- called upon by the Council, to lay before ter of infinite inconvenience in point of it a particular account of the alterations ervice, as well as the occasion of extra- and variations designed; and on several vagance in point of expense, &c." directed subsequent occasions, in which the said a committee composed of all flag officers establishment was departed from, a minute unemployed, of the commissioners of the detail of the variation was previously subnavy who were sea officers, under the pre-mitted for the approbation of his Majesty sidency of Sir John Norris, Admiral of the fleet, and assisted by all the master shipwrights, to consider and propose proper establishments of guns, men, scantling of timbers, masts, yards, stores, &c. for each rate and class of his Majesty's ships. This committee made a very elaborate report, and the whole was established by Order in Council of His Majesty King George the Second, on the 27th of March, 1746. in council. We the rather notice these tion of 74's appears to have gradually ad- Guns Men Guns 5th Rate.......... 44 38 6th Rate 30 The frigates rated at 40 guns carry 50, and those rated at 38 carry 46 and upwards. The majority of those rated at 36 guns carry 44, and some of those rated at $2 carry 46 and 48, being more than others that are rated at 38 and 36. During the whole of the period herein be- | day of her capture, were 54, besides one fore referred to, and indeed down to 1793, 42 pounder howitzer. the force of the ships was stated from the actual number of guns they really carried; but the introduction of carronades, which begau partially in 1779, and which was finally adopted, on the present extended scale in the Navy, during the course of the first revolutionary war, increased the armament of the vessels, as they were found able to carry a greater number of carronades than the guns in whose stead they were adopted, so that the real force of the ships has no longer corresponded with their nominal force; and that principle of variation being ouce admitted, ships have since that time received denominations as to their number of guns, often, we believe, capriciously, and in one or two classes only of the whole navy, agreeing with their real force. A few instances will shew your Royal Highness the inconsistencies into which this deviation from the old rules of the sertice has led. The Caledonia, rated 120 guns, carries 120 guus; while the Hibernia, a ship of nearly the same dimensions, which carries exactly the same number of guns, is rated only at 110 guns, being a less number by 4 than that at which the San Joseph is rated, though the former has in fact 10guns more than the latter. All ships of the second rate, though rated at 98, carry upwards of 100 guns, and they have all more guns than the St. George, a first rate, which is rated and carries 100 guns; and they ought all, therefore, according to the established regulations, to be included in the first rate, and there are in fact no real second rates, viz. three deckers of between 90 and 100 guns, at present existing in the Royal Navy, in a sea-going condition. In the 3d rate, some of the ships rated at 80 guns, carry near 90, and others rated at 74 carry 80 guns, but the majority of the same denomination carry 74, and this is one of the very few cases in which the real and nominal force agree. In the fourth rate, of the ships rated at 50 guns, one class (that on two decks) carries 58 guns, another (that on one deck) carries 60 and upwards. In the fifth-rate there are three frigates rated at 44 guns, namely, the Sybille, taken from the French, which carries 48 guns; the Lavinia, built after her, which carries 50 guns; and the late American ship President, the guns mounted in which, on the Similar differences between the real and the nominal amount of force exist in the fifth-rate, but it is unnecessary to specify the details. We trust we shall be excused for observwholly unworthy the character of the ing to your Royal Highness, that it is Royal Navy of this kingdom, to maintaiu this system, which, though introduced by the accidental cause we have mentioned, and without any design of deception, yet may give occasion to foreign nations to accuse us of misrepresentation, when we state that a British frigate of 38 guns has the British frigate was of equal, if not sutaken a foreign frigate of 44, when, in fact, perior, force. We therefore humbly recommend, that your Royal Highness will be pleased to order, that the rule for stating the force of his Majesty's ships, which prevailed prior to the year 1793, and which, in fact, never was formally abrogated, should be revived and established; and that in future all his Majesty's ships should be rated at the number of guns and carronades which they actually carry, on their decks, quarterdecks and forecastles. of the service will render some slight variaThe recurrence to this ancient practice tion, as to the limits of some of the rates themselves, necessary; and we therefore humbly propose that the following scale, of rates be adopted : : The first rate to include all three-deckers, inasmuch as all sea-going ships of that description carry 100 guns and upwards. The second rate to include all ships of 80 guns and upwards, on two decks. The third rate to include all ships of 70 or upwards and less than 80 guns. The fourth rate to include all ships of 50 and upwards, but less than 70 guns. The fifth rate to include all ships from 36 to 50 guns. The sixth rate to include all ships from 24 to 56 guns. Though, by this regulation, no ship under 24 guns will hereafter be a post ship, we, in pursuance of the ancient practice of the service, propose that all his Majesty's yachts should be considered as post ships, and should be rated, one as a second rate, and the rest as third rates, but with such complements as we may appoint. It is necessary here to state, that several sloops are now rated as post ships, and vice versa; and, as much inconvenience to the officer who may be in the command of such ships, and much embarrassment to the public service, would arise, if the present rates of such vessels were to be immediately changed, we submit to your Royal Highness that with regard to any such vessels at present in commission, this new arrangement shall not apply, until they shall be paid off, or till some other favourable opportunity shall offer of placing them in their proper rates. Your Royal Highness will observe that this scheme differs very little from that which has grown into use, and still less from the last establishment (that of 1746,) which had the sanction of his Majesty in Council, and which, strictly speaking, may be said to be still in force. We beg leave farther to represent to your Royal Highness, that the schemes for manning his Majesty's ships have, from the causes already referred to with regard to the guns, and from accidental and temporary circumstances, become so very various, that though these six rates were originally intended to regulate, amongst other things, the amount of the respective complements, there exist at this moment, not fewer than twenty-nine different scales for manning the ships of the six rates; the third rate alone including seven distinct complements. It were to be desired that all this variety and irregularity should be abolished; but we have seen that, so early as the year 1746, there were sixteen schemes of manning, and the variety of ships which have been from time to time built or captured (which though they may fall under the same rate, are yet of very different sizes) render perfect uniformity in this poiņt impracticable: we are, however, of opinion, on mature consideration, that this variety may be very much diminished, and that two, and, in one or two rates, three schemes of manning, in each rate, will be found to answer all the practical purposes of the service, aud will tend to simplify the system, by thus reducing the twentynine schemes before mentioned to thirteen or fourteen. that we cannot propose to reduce the eight Of sloops there are so many varieties, schemes of complement now existing, to less than four: viz. sloops, 135, 125, 95, and 75 men. bombs, we propose to reduce to from ten Brigs (not sloops), cutters, schooners and schemes of complement to two, namely, 60 or 50 men. And we also propose that for small craft, which may not require so large a complement as 50 men, we may be authorized to assign such a complement as we may deem necessary. As there are no longer any regular fire ships in the service, we humbly propose that, whenever it may become necessary to fit out any vessels of this description, we may be authorized to assign to them such complement of officers and men, together with the pay of such rate or class, as the size of the vessel employed, or the nature of the particular service may render expedient. We farther propose, that when it shall be necessary to fit out troop ships, we may be authorized to assign to them such rates and complements as may seem proper. By these regulations, the forty-seven varieties of complements, now in use in the navy, will be reduced to twenty. Highness our proposition for the rating and Having thus submitted to your Royal manning of his Majesty's ships, it is next rigging and arming of ships are at least our duty to state, that the varieties in the gularities and deviation from establishment as great as in the complements; the irrein regard to the form, scantling, &c. of his Majesty's ships, complained of in 1745, much more serious injury to the service, are now exceedingly increased, and are of both in respect to convenience and economy. It is obvious that the extra expense of providing masts, yards, rigging, and stores of various dimensions, for ships of the same actual force, must be very great; because, if not required for the particular ship for which they were originally pre |