The tide of naval opinion was then setting back in the old _Dreadnought_ direction. More complete protection was being demanded. The quick-firer was just coming in and its potentialities seemed enormous. The secondary battery had to be protected. Destruction of communications on board began to take on a fresh and more serious aspect. In a word, the Admiralty reverted to Reed ideas, and in reverting exaggerated them. In such circumstances the general idea of the _Trafalgars_ was born. Sir N. Barnaby totally dissented from the Admiralty line of thought. In his view the size of a ship could not legitimately be increased unless her offensive powers increased in proportion; in the _Trafalgar_ idea both speed and armament were reduced as compared to the _Admiral_ class, and over a thousand odd tons added entirely to carry extra defensive armour. Over which dispute he resigned his position. Details of the _Nile_ and _Trafalgar_ as built are:-- Displacement--11,940 tons. Length (between perpendiculars)--345ft. Beam--73ft. Draught (mean)--27½ft. Armament--Four 13.5-inch, six 4.7 Q.F., also smaller guns, and four 14-inch torpedo tubes, of which two were submerged. Armour (compound)--Belt, 230ft. long (_i.e._, 80ft. longer than in the _Admirals_ and _Victorias_), 20--16in., with 16--14 inch bulkheads, protective deck at ends and over main belt. Over this a redoubt 141ft. long, 18in. thick. Above the redoubt a battery, 4in. thick. Turrets, 18in. Horse-power--12,000 = 17 knots. Coal--(normal) 900 tons; (maximum) 1,200 tons = 6,500 miles at 10 knots. [Illustration: _Photo_] [_Russell & Sons._ SIR N. BARNABY. A recent photograph.] The _Nile_ was built at Pembroke and engined by Maudslay. She was laid down in April, 1886, launched in March, 1888, and completed some two years later. The _Trafalgar_ was laid down at Portsmouth in January, 1886, and launched in September, 1887. Her machinery was supplied by Humphrys. The armour of these ships weighed no less than 4,230 tons, _i.e._, some 35 per cent. of the displacement instead of the more usual 25 per cent. or so. The then first Lord of the Admiralty took the occasion of the launch to remark that the days of such armoured ships were over, and that probably these were the last ironclads that would ever be built--the future would lie with fast deck-protected vessels! As, for three years, no more armoured ships were laid down, he at least enunciated a definite policy when these heavily armoured successors of the _Admiral_ class were put afloat. They differed from the _Admirals_ in that turrets were reverted to instead of barbettes, and, as already mentioned, they were really nothing but modernised versions of the old low freeboard _Dreadnought_. At a later date 6-inch Q.F. were substituted for the 4.7’s; but no other schemes of modernising the ships ever came to a head. _PROTECTED CRUISERS OF THE BARNABY ERA._