became necessary, therefore, for this division and the centre to pass Lestock, which took some time with the light airs prevailing.  Two or three manoeuvres succeeded, with the object of forming the fighting order, a column similar and parallel to that of the enemy, and to get closer to him.  When night fell a signal was still flying for the line abreast, by which, if completed, the ships would be ranged on a line parallel to the allies, and heading towards them; consequently abreast of each other.  It would then need only a change of course to place them in column, sides to the enemy; which, as before said, was the fighting order—­the “line of battle.”

The line abreast, however, was not fully formed at dark.  Therefore the admiral, in order to hasten its completion, soon afterwards made a night signal, with lanterns, for the fleet to bring-to,—­that is, bring their sides to the wind, and stop.  He intended thereby that the ships already in station should stand still, while the others were gaining their places, all which is a case of simple evolution, by land as by sea.  It was contended by the admiral that Vice-Admiral Lestock’s division was then too far to the right and rear, and hence too distant from the enemy, and that it was his duty first to get into his station and then to bring-to.  To this the vice-admiral on his trial replied, first, that he was not out of his station; and, second, that if he were, the later signal, to bring-to, suspended the earlier, to form line abreast, and that it was therefore his business, without any discretion, to stop where he was.  Concerning the first plea, a number of witnesses, very respectable in point of rank and opportunity for seeing, testified that the vice-admiral did bring-to three or four miles to the right and rear of his place in the line abreast, reckoning his station from the admiral’s ship; yet, as the Court peremptorily rejected their evidence, it is probably proper to accept the contemporary decision as to this matter of fact.

But as regards the second plea, being a matter of military correctness, a difference of opinion is allowable.  The Court adopted as its own the argument of the vice-admiral.  Without entering here into a technical discussion, the Court’s ruling, briefly stated, was that the second signal superseded the first, so that, if the vice-admiral was in the wrong place, it was not his duty to get into the right before stopping; and that this was doubly the case because an article of the Night Signals (7) prescribed that, under the conditions of the alleged offence, “a fleet sailing before the wind, or nearly so, if the admiral made the signal for the fleet to bring-to, the windward ships should bring-to first.”  Therefore, if Lestock was to windward, as the charge read, it was his duty to bring-to first and at once.  It is evident, however, that even the Sailing Instructions, cast-iron as they were, contemplated a fleet in order, not one in process of forming order; and that to bring-to helter-skelter,