Sir Edward J. Reed

Summary

Sir Edward J. Reed Modern ships of war (1887)

To say nothing of European naval armaments, it is only necessary to point to some of the smaller powers in our own hemisphere that possess ships-of-war with which we have nothing fit to cope.
Our people cannot desire to assume a position in the society of naval powers without supporting the position with dignity; they cannot wish their navy to be cited as a standard of inefficiency; they cannot wish to force their representatives (the officers of the navy) into a position of humiliation and mortification such as is imposed by being called on to deprecate criticism by labored explanations.
Source: Gutenberg

Sir Edward J. Reed Modern ships of war (1887)

A mistaken naval policy is to any nation a grave disaster, but to England it means ruin. “We cannot allow,” wrote Lord Brassey, “any foreign power to possess vessels which we cannot overhaul, or to carry guns at sea which may inflict a damaging blow to which it is impossible for us to reply. We must have ships as fast as the fastest, and guns at least equal to the most powerful which are to be found in the hands of any possible enemy.”
Source: Gutenberg

Sir Edward J. Reed Modern ships of war (1887)

Is the future to be as fertile in thought and deed? Are the destroyers of Ericsson, the dynamite safety shells of Hayes, the guns of Zalinski, the torpedoes of Howell, Sims, or Berdan, the turrets of Timby, the submarine monitors of Tuck, the gun-carriages of King or Buffington, the ordnance of Sicard, Benét—are these to prove that Yankee brain and brawn are potent yet for the mastery of the problem?
The country has no plainer duty than to foster by every care American ideas working in national ways of thought.
Source: Gutenberg

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature