at 10 ft. below the surface. Considerable stress has been laid on the fact that in this experiment the charge was in actual contact, and yet did not effect complete penetration. It is even gravely asserted that an actual torpedo would have rebounded a certain distance before explosion took place, and this would diminish its effect. In the first place, the detonation of guncotton is practically instantaneous, so that impact and explosion would be simultaneous. We are hardly prepared to allow an inch rebound, but will concede that until actual proof convicts us of error. In the second place, it is possible that a distance of three or four feet between charge and ship would rather augment than diminish the effect produced in the case of such an explosive as guncotton when sufficiently immersed. It is possible the intervening water thrown against the side of the ship would do more damage than the gas liberated in actual contact. At any rate, experiments some years ago with smaller quantities of both dynamite and guncotton showed that when exploded 4 ft. from the bottom of a ship, enormous damage was inflicted on her. Although it is generally estimated that guncotton is about four times more powerful than gunpowder, this does not appear to hold good under all conditions; while, on the other hand, for certain purposes, ten times the amount of gunpowder would not produce the same result. This is proved by the ease with which the strongest chain cable and wire rope can be ruptured by a small charge of guncotton, which even more than ten times the amount of gunpowder could not accomplish. This is due to the peculiar shattering action of detonated guncotton, which the slower burning substances does not possess, its characteristic being more of the nature of a push than a blow. Taking into consideration the method in which the hull of the Resistance had been strengthened for this experiment, and the exact locality chosen for the explosion, it is probable that less than twice the amount of gunpowder would have caused a more complete breach through the coal protection. The torpedo is stated to have had everything in its favor; whereas, in our opinion, all the advantages were on the side of the ship. The attack was made at her strongest point, where the coal was specially disposed, and her shape under water lent no assistance to the explosive. To assume from this that if a similar torpedo struck lower down, or further aft, or against the propeller, the ship would still have "her offensive powers not materially impaired," is to express an opinion with which few will be found to concur.