either admiral
were confined to the particular field ascribed to him, but simply that
in general they were led by circumstances to illustrate that chiefly.
Nelson in his fine campaign in the Baltic evinced his profound
intuitions in the science of strategy; and Farragut, as has been said,
showed no mean tactical ability in the provisions made for his several
battles. The dispositions to be adopted were with him the subject of
very careful consideration; and before Mobile he spent hours with his
flag lieutenant studying, by the aid of little wooden models, the
different positions in which the ships might be placed. Afterward he had
the squadron get under way several times to practice keeping close
order, and changing formation and course.

Like all men who have achieved eminence, the secret of Admiral
Farragut's success is to be found in natural aptitudes carefully
improved, and in a corresponding opportunity for action. How much he was
indebted to the latter, is evident from the fact that he had passed his
sixtieth year before his great qualities were manifested to the world.
He was fortunate also, as was Nelson, in the conditions which he was
called to meet. Great as were the difficulties confronting each, and
brilliantly as they rose to the demand made upon their energies, it may
safely be said that more perfect preparation upon the part of their
enemies would either have detracted from the completeness of their
victories; or else, by imposing greater deliberation and more methodical
execution, would have robbed their exploits of that thunderbolt
character which imparts such dramatic brilliancy to the Nile and
Trafalgar, to New Orleans and Mobile Bay. A modern torpedo line would
not leave the gap by which Farragut first meant to profit, nor would it
be crossed with the impunity he found; nor could Nelson in his day,
without courting destruction, have used against a thoroughly efficient
enemy the tactics that admirably suited the conditions in Aboukir Bay
and off Cape Trafalgar. But these considerations do not diminish the
credit of either admiral, though they help to explain the fullness of
their success, and justify proceedings which under different
circumstances would be unjustifiable. Rather, it may be said that, in
the adaptation of their measures to the conditions opposed to them, what
would otherwise invite condemnation as rashness, demands recognition as
genius.

For Farragut had a natural genius for war, to