Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 02.djvu/61

ARMORER. cavalry and to each company of infantry to clean the arms. Aboard a man-of-war the armorer and armorer's mate did the blacksmith work of the vessel: but of late years the armorer is a petty officer and one of the gunner's gang, his duties being the care of the arms used by the ship's company. Aboard ship each man is not responsible for the care of his weapon, as is the case with soldiers.

ARMOR'ICA (Celt, ar, on or near + mor, sea, Lat. mare. Slav. more; cf. Pomerania, Slav., coastland, and Paramaribo, the dwelling near the sea). The country of the Armoriei, the name by which the people occupying the coast of Gaul between the Seine and the Loire were known to Caesar. At a later period the name Armorica was confined to the country afterwards styled Britannia Minor, or Bretagne.

ARMORIC LAN'GUAGE. See Celtic Language.

AR'MOR PLATE. The protection of ves- sels of war by metallic plating began soon after the introduction of heavy guns on board ship, but was a matter of little importance until the introduction of shell-fire and the increased power of guns made the protcction all'ordcd by thick wooden sid<-s wliolly inadequate. The demand for armor became more imperative as time went on, owing to the greater use of machinery and apparatus which needed protection, even against comparatively small guns; and, in recent years, its use has been further stimulated by the introduction of guns of the rapid-firing types. The first important use of armor plate was made in the operations against Gibraltar in 1782. The Chevalier d'Arcon had caused to be constructed 10 Moating batteries of GOO to 1200 tons, armed with 10 to 20 guns each. The hulls were of wood, protected with bars of iron laid on at short intervals, with an outer covering of cork. Sand was jjlaeed in the spaces between the bars, and it was to be kept wet to avoid danger of fire from red-hot shot. The deck over the guns was of very solid construction, and covered with thi(k green hides. At the attack on Gibraltar of September 13, 1782, one of the vessels took fire, and. as they were moored very close together, the conllagratlon spread to the others, and they were all destroyed. Xo provision had been made for extinguishing fire, as it was thought the means to prevent it were ample. Boats, even, were not supplied, so that of the 5260 men who formed the crews, only 487 were saved. Subse- quent to this were many suggestions as to the employment of armor plating. About 1812, Col. ,7ohn Stevens, of New .Jersey, prepared plans for an armored steam vessel for harbor defense. Explosive shells, which had hitherto been used only in mortars, were in 1824 prepared for service in the ordinary smooth-bore guns of the French ships: and at that time General Paix- hans. in an oflicial letter to the French Govern- ment, predicted that this new departure woiild force the creation of armored ships, .hout 1830 the French Government began experiments (the first were carried out at Metz) to determine the resistance of earth, wood, and different types of masonry to the penetration of spherical projec- tiles. These experiments were continued at in- tervals for several years, and the results ob- tained are still considered of some value. In 184L General Paixhans, who invented the shell for low-angle fire, recommended the appli- cation of armor jjlate to the sides of vessels as a protection against his own missiles. His plans were rejected, but they attracted much attention. In 1841, also, the sons of Col. .John .Stevens pro- posed to the United States Navy Department to build an ironclad steamer of higli speed, in which all of the machinery, including the propellers, was to be below the water-line. The proposal was accepted, and tlie act of Congress, approved April 14, 1842, authorized the Secretary of the Navy to "contract for the construction of a war steamer, shot and shell proof, to be built princi- pally of iron, upon the plan of the said Ste- vens." The Stevens brothers had been carrying on armor experiments of their o-ti, and as a result of them had decided that a thickness of 4.5 inches would be sufficient to render the new vessel invulnerable. Just as the Stevens ship was about to be conunenced the performances of John Ericsson's large wrought-iron gun showed that 4.5 inches of laminated armor was insufficient for the purpose in view, so that when the Stevens battery was finally begun in 1854 — two months before any armored craft in Europe had been laid down — it was as a Larger vessel than that originally designed, in order to carry armor of 6.75 inches. The Stevens battery was never completed, largely because general inter- est in the project subsided, but specifically be- cause Congress refused further appropriations. In 1841 Theodore R. Timby submitted to the United States War Dejiartment plans for a revolving armor-plated battery, and in 1843 he filed a caveat for "a metallic revolving fort, to be used on land or vxater, and to be revolved by propelling engines located within the same, and acting upon suitable machinery." In 1845 M. Dupuy de Lome submitted the plans of an iron- hulled armor-plated frigate. He believed that by substituting iron for wood he could reduce the weight of the hull from 42 per cent, of the dis- placement to 23, and this saving would be suffi- cient to give the sliip an armor belt 8 feet wide and 6.5 inclics thick. The plans were rejected on the ground that he had overestimated the weight which would be saved, that, even if the pro- posals were feasible, a 6.5-inch belt was not in- vulnerable, and that, moreover, the battery was left without protection. In 1846, the French con- structors were called upon for plans of an ar- mored floating battery for coast defense. One of these provided for an iron hull and was at first accepted, as the light liull permitted an increased thiclcness of arnior. but it was finally rejected on account of the anticipated deteriora- tion and loss of speed from the fouling of the bottom. No steps were taken to build any of the batteries at this time : but at the outbreak of the Crimean War the plans of the b.atteries were again taken up and experiments with armor were begun at Vincennes to determine what the proper kind sheuld be. These tests resulted in showing the inferiority of laminated plating as compared with solid plates of the same thick- ness. Solid plates 4 inches thick were broken, but not pierced, by both 32-pounder solid shot and 8-inch and !)-inch hollow shot. It was therefore decided to armor the batteries with 4.5-inch plates. About 1846 or 1847, Lieutenant Hunter, of the United States Navy, brought out a plan of an armor-deck for the protection of the machinery of vessels, and it very closely resembled.