Though we had thus by 1862 made a good start with armoured ships, the fleet contained a great many wooden ships at that time, either completed or building. It was then determined to convert several of them into ironclads. A certain number were selected for this purpose, cut down, lengthened, and armoured similarly to the iron ships with 4½-in. plates secured to 30 in. of teak backing. These measures produced the 'Prince Consort,' ’Ocean,' 'Caledonia,' 'Royal Alfred,' and 'Royal Oak.' In the two last the armour was 6 in. thick. Two others, the 'Lord Clyde' and 'Lord Warden,' were also built of wood and armoured. Iron was still considered to have disadvantages, which are expressed in a memorandum by Sir Spencer Robinson, then Controller of the Navy, and dated March 2d, 1863. These were, liability of the bottom to injury and to becoming coated with marine growth; small quantity of good iron in the market and uncertainty of quality; greater cost of iron ships. If they were more durable, there was the probability of their becoming obsolete, and thus a cheaper and less durable vessel might prove best in the end. For some such reasons the French preferred wood. There is good sense in these arguments, though much might be said on the other side. The danger of durable ships is the temptation to resist building new ones, and to be content with patching up what has rendered good service. Ten years ago we were under this influence, and our naval strength was thereby impaired. The recent Naval Defence Act broke the spell.
