Some of the obscurity which pervades this difficult subject may be overcome, as to broad and general principles, by attentively and _coolly_ observing the progress of marine architecture, since the introduction of cannon into naval warfare, and more particularly during the last century and a half. We shall then clearly perceive that the French, who, as early as the beginning of the reign of Louis XIV., employed men of first-rate talent in their naval arsenals, and neglected no opportunity for the [p031] advancement of science in them, increased and kept increasing the dimensions of their ships, more especially the length, the ratio of which to the breadth has been augmented by them from about 3-1/4.1, to 4.1 within the last century. While this principle was acted on, the improvement of their ships was gradual; and by referring to our own progress in the art, in tardy imitation of the practice of the French, we shall likewise conclude that our navy has derived precisely similar advantages from the same causes. Here we have at once two grand but _concurring_ results derived from an experiment, not made on one or half a dozen different vessels, but on the whole navies of the two most powerful maritime states in the world: and if to these we choose to add the result of the practice of the same means on the Spanish and other navies, we might surely be warranted in saying, from this broad but _certain analysis_ of _facts_, that, in relation to the hull, the _general increase of dimensions, with a greater relative length_, is one cause of the improvements that have been made in the sea-going qualities of the ships composing the fleets of the present maritime powers: the question therefore that remains to be decided on in relation to this principle is, whether we have arrived at its utmost practicable limits, or rather, whether we have arrived at the _maximum_ of improvement it is capable of producing. This brings us again to the experimental squadrons, as far as they are connected with, and illustrative of, our observations; and the first question naturally put forward about them is, whether there be any thing very peculiar in the formation or dimensions of the rival vessels? We suspect that the answer cannot otherwise than disclose, that neither in principle, dimensions, nor in the formation, can they be said to differ very materially from each other, or from ships of the common construction: indeed we perceive in some a retrogression of ideas and a violation of the principle, that the increase of the ratio of the length to the breadth, in conjunction with a general increase of dimensions, has been a predominant cause of improvement. The fact also of so immaterial a difference necessarily includes a system of masting and sails equally confined, and totally inadequate to produce any great superiority of sailing over ships to which they are so nearly equal in principal dimensions. [p032]