The Thornycroft boiler is fitted in many torpedo-boats and destroyers, for our own and foreign Governments. It was placed in the Speedy, a torpedo-cruiser of 4500 HP., in 1893, and is found in Danish and British third-class cruisers, and in Austrian and German vessels, including the Aegir and Hagen, of 5000 HP. each. It is adopted in part in other battleships, and in the Niobe cruiser, of 8000 HP., and will be put into the United States battleships Ohio and Missouri, of 15,000 and 16,000 HP. respectively. A list of water-tube boilers fitted in battleships and cruisers in foreign navies can be consulted in the 'Memorandum respecting Water Tube Boilers in H.M. Ships'; but this does not include small vessels, such as despatch boats. A few words may be offered in conclusion, respecting the choice of the Belleville boiler, and the present re-opening of the entire question of cylindrical versus Belleville, Niclausse, Babcock and Wilcox, and other types, on the lines laid down by Lord Goschen, and reported in the Times' of August 8th, 1900. When the Admiralty adopted the Belleville, they accepted a well tried type, which was already in use in other navies, as it still is, to a greater extent than its rivals. But they made a mistake in adopting it to the exclusion of all other types, assuming without sufficient data that it would remain unrivalled for an indefinite period. It was a case of putting all the eggs into one basket, with the result that the whole question has now to be re-opened. Other Governments have adopted the wiser policy, which would recommend itself to the private individual, of testing the merits of the various competitors. England is the only country, with the exception of Holland, which is committed to a single type of boiler for her heavy ships. In other navies several types, such as the Belleville, the Niclausse, the Babcock and Wilcox, the Lagrafel d'Allest, are simultaneously employed. Another judicious method adopted abroad is that of placing a certain number of water-tube boilers and boilers of the Scotch type in the same vessel, for comparative trials. Three United States cruisers are thus fitted, and eleven German, including the Fürst Bismarck. In Germany, the Dürr boiler, the Belleville, and Niclausse, are fitted on three sister ships, the Victoria Louise, the Hertha, and the Freya, each of 10,000 HP. In the French Navy, the cruisers Bugeaud, Chasseloup-Laubat, and the Friant, of 9000 tons, are fitted with Belleville, Lagrafel d'Allest, and Niclausse types respectively. Further, when the Annapolis and the Marietta in the American Navy were both fitted with Babcock boilers, instead of trusting to a trial trip of a few hours' duration only, the vessels were sent for lengthy trips round the Pacific coast, the Horn, and the West Indies, to be tried under all conditions of service. In the British Navy, on the contrary, before the Powerful and the Terrible were subjected to any extended trials, the Belleville type was generally adopted; and this in spite of the fact that other boilers had already achieved a high reputation abroad. Vessels should have been fitted with various kinds of boilers, and sent on lengthy cruises, and the results carefully collated by practical men. Precious time has now been lost, with the result that we have not yet got beyond the experimental stage. This state of indecision in regard to the most vital element in the Navy, on the efficiency of which our commerce and our very existence depend, is a parlous condition for the greatest engineering nation in the world to be in. It is worth while to observe that, almost alone among the nations, the United States has held aloof from Belleville boilers. A recent report of Admiral Melville to the Naval Bureau of Washington states that these boilers have been opposed 'wholly on a close examination of the design,' the screwed method of jointing of the tubes being particularly objectionable. The Engineer-in-chief congratulates his Bureau that they were not encumbered with Belleville boilers during the last war, since they require a specially trained force for their safe operation. In this, as in other matters, the views of American engineers are to be regarded with respect. Six types of water-tube boilers are now on trial in the United States Navy, the Babcock and Wilcox taking the lead ('Memorandum,' p. 39); but the nation is not committed to any one-a fact which makes the short-sightedness of our Admiralty in committing the country to one type all the more flagrant. Much prejudice has entered into the controversy regarding water-tube boilers, and for this reason the Government did wisely in excluding from the Committee those who were personally interested in this branch of manufacVol. 193.-No. 386. 2 G ture. There are many large establishments in the three kingdoms which have extensive and costly plant laid down for the construction of boilers of cylindrical types, which will be of little use if the water-tube type becomes common; and these firms have vested interests in the retention of present designs. Yet the water-tube boilers are the type of the future; and the survival of the fittest is now being worked out. Out of hundreds of designs, those really successful can be counted on the fingers, while in regard to those specially adapted for service in navies, the choice now lies between about seven or eight only, and these are narrowed down to three or four for use in the largest vessels. Let us hope that the mistake of reboilering the Navy with a single type will not be repeated, nor the Belleville be discarded until by means of extended trials the fittest is at last evolved. Perhaps the problem will be solved by the adoption of different kinds of boilers for slower and faster ships, for steady steaming and for forced service. : The Interim Report of the Boiler Committee has been published since this article was in type. It is not necessary to repeat its recommendations verbatim: we need only summarise the more important of them. The attention of the Committee was specially directed to three questions (1) Whether water-tube boilers were to be considered more suitable than cylindrical boilers for Naval purposes? To this the reply was that they are, provided a satisfactory type be adopted. (2) Does the Belleville boiler possess such advantages as to recommend it as the best adapted for H.M. Navy? The reply to this question was in the negative. (3) The third question asked was, whether the Committee were prepared to make recommendations or suggestions as to the extent to which particular type or types of boilers should be fitted in new vessels? The answer was unequivocal. No more Bellevilles should be fitted in any ships to be ordered in the future, nor in ships recently ordered for which the boiler work is not far advanced. Only in those cases where an alteration in the type of boiler would delay the completion of ships under construction, and in completed ships, should Bellevilles be retained. The fact is admitted that at the time when this type was ordered for the Powerful and Terrible, it was the only one which had been tried at sea on a considerable scale. But the Babcock and Wilcox, the Niclausse, the Dürr, and a modified Yarrow with large tubes are now recommended for extended trials. These recommendations are, on the whole, in harmony with our ideas. The pity is that this common-sense view was not taken earlier, that such a Committee was not appointed six years ago, and that extended trials were not made before the country became responsible for so lavish and, as it turns out, fruitless expenditure. It is also annoying to learn that although "To obtain satisfactory results in the working of the Belleville boiler, . more than ordinary experience and skill are required on the part of the engine-room staff, it appears from the evidence placed before the Committee that the engineer officers in charge of Belleville boilers have not been made acquainted with the best method of working the boilers.' Had this preliminary been observed, it is possible that the results would have been different. As we explained in the preceding pages, all the boilers named by the Committee for trial possess good points; but rash and hasty conclusions are to be deprecated. Each type is still on its trial in the great fighting Navies. Each probably is better adapted for one class of battleship than the others. Nothing but a series of comparative tests, which have yet to be made, will enable the Committee to form trustworthy conclusions as to their relative merits, when compared with each other and with the Belleville. Until the final Report appears, the public, like the experts themselves, must patiently suspend judgment on the question of re-boilering the Navy. Art. VI. THE HOUSING QUESTION. 1. The Health of Nations. A review of the works of Edwin Chadwick. By Benjamin Ward Richardson. Two vols. London: Longmans, 1887. 2. Essays on Rural Hygiene. By George Vivian Poore, M.D., F.R.C.P. Second edition. London: Longmans, 1894. 3. The Dwelling House. By G. V. Poore. London: Longmans, 1897. 4. The Housing Question in London, 1855–1900. Prepared under the direction of C. J. Stewart, Clerk to the Council. London: P. S. King, n.d. 5. No Room to Live. By George Haw. London: Wells, 1900. 6. Homes of the London Poor. By Octavia Hill. London: Macmillan, 1875. 7. Houses for the Working Classes. Papers read at a Conference on March 1st, 1900, and issued by the National Housing Committee. London: P. S. King, 1900. WE have heard objection raised in public debate to the phrase Housing of the Poor,' on the ground that it is one more applicable to cattle than to the poorer citizens of a great empire. The complaint will be generally thought hypercritical, for the term is convenient and is used by all classes without any intention of offence. At the same time it does bear witness to the existence of certain circumstances which differentiate very sharply the agencies which supply the poor with homes from those which supply them with food and clothing. In common parlance we have what is called the Housing Question, but happily we have no Feeding or Clothing Question. These last important branches of supply have been met by the ordinary operation of economic exchange. The whole world is laid under contribution for the food and clothing of even the poorest among the King's subjects; and the process is performed so smoothly and automatically that we rarely pause to admire. If we except extreme theoretical socialists, who favour a state-organisation of all industry, and whose views we do not propose to consider in this article, there is no one who invokes the aid of municipal authority for feeding and clothing the poor. The relief of the destitute by the Poor Law is exceptional; and normally the supply of food and clothing is left to |