We must not forget also that our active neighbours the French have now adopted a most formidable description of [p036] frigates, with curvilinear sterns[20], and many other important improvements. They mount 60 guns and carronades—viz. 24-pounders on the gun deck, and 36-pounder carronades on the flush deck.—The former calibre is equivalent very nearly to 26, and the latter to 39 lbs. avoirdupois. When we reflect on these circumstances, we cannot but feel surprised that so many frigates of inferior force and dimensions should be building in our dockyards. In time of emergency they will only bring on us a repetition of former disasters and deficiency. We contend that, instead of building ships of only _equal_ force to those of our rivals, and thus _waiting_ for the developement of _their_ designs before we can venture on a single step, we should build beyond them in every respect. It must and ought to be recollected, that peace in these matters produces a contest of intellect, and those will have the advantage in it who attack instead of standing on the defensive. We ought to lead the way, and to be at the head of the maritime world, not in _number_ alone, but also in the _individual force and qualities_ of our ships. Having expatiated on the advantages of an increased ratio of length to breadth in relation to the hull of a ship, we will just glance at some of the principal effects it would have upon the masting and sails; and here again we conceive that Professor Inman has, in common with many others, relinquished the many good effects resulting from it, for the inadequate one, of being able to carry a somewhat greater quantity of sail, which must necessarily be lofty, and which, (setting aside this detracting circumstance,) as the velocity of a ship varies only as a _fractional_ power of the surface of canvas spread, cannot produce the degree of fast sailing to be wished for, but at an immense and impracticable quantity of sail[21]. A greater proof of the inadequacy of the present system of [p037] lofty sail cannot be cited than the fact of its not procuring, under the most favourable circumstances, a rate of sailing rarely exceeding one-fourth the velocity of the wind. As the number of masts should be so regulated as to create facility in managing the canvas, which is well known to be at present hardly manageable in a gale of wind, on board large ships, from the enormous size of each individual course and topsail, we should not hesitate, therefore, to have _four_ vertical masts, as recommended by Bouguer, instead of three, in ships built in accordance with the principles we have been discussing. This would, _cæteris paribus_, require shorter masting and smaller yards, and the sails being much less, individually, would be more easily managed and not so liable to accidents.