Chapter II: Introduction

The third Error is one which Sir Thomas Brown has taken Notice of; and it must be acknowledged, that the inserting of it here was a Mistake. However, we hope that it will be excused, since it is seven Years since the Author of this little Pamphlet had the Pleasure of reading _a Part_ of Dr. Brown's Vulgar Errors, and then he did not see that Error; it being not regularly placed among the others, but in a separate Detachment from the main Body. Notwithstanding the general Perspicuity of this Author, we are apt to think that he never heard a Bittern himself, but only went by Hearsay with respect to the Noise which is made by that Bird, however skilled he shews himself in the Anatomy of it. He says, that it differs but little from the croaking of a Raven. We can assure the Reader, that neither the Noise it makes when it draws in the Air, nor the Sound it gives when it throws it out again, have the least Resemblance to the Croaking of a Raven, as he calls it.

A Raven makes a much shriller Noise than any of the Crow Kind, notwithstanding it is a larger Bird. I make no Doubt but the Voice of a Raven is twelve or thirteen Notes higher than the Voice of a Rook; besides, he makes his Notes quick and sharp one after another; whereas a Bittern takes near five Seconds between every Sound, and (as will be affirmed) in as deep a Note as the fourth String of a double Bass.

* * * * *

ERROR I.

_That the more Ammunition is put into a Fowling Piece, the farther it
will do Execution._

This Error is often of very dangerous and dreadful Consequence; I have known People so obstinate in it, that even ocular Demonstration would not convince them of their Mistake.

It proceeds from a Notion, that the more a Gun recoils, the better and stronger will be the Force with which the Shot fly out.

There is nothing which requires more Nicety and Exactness than the finding out the proper Charge of a Gun; it is something similar to finding out the Tone of a musical Instrument; of which more in its Place.

It will be sufficient here to say, that every Gun has a certain fixed Quantity of Ammunition, with which it does the most Execution. I have seen Lectures in the Art of Gunnery, which come under the Science of Mechanics, and even the Author himself, though a Man of Learning and Abilities, seems to have been ignorant of the Art of charging a Gun, when he says, "If you put in a Gun, a Ball upon a Quantity of Powder as (1), it will throw the Ball to such a Distance; if you put in a Quantity as (2), it will throw it as far again." This seems to be a Mistake; because, if that was the Case, a Person would have nothing to do but to put Powder enough into his Gun, and have the Barrel made strong enough, and he need not fear killing at any Distance. As to the Recoil it would give, if the Gunner was a strong Country Gentleman, and a keen Sportsman, and an Englishman, it would be the least of his Thoughts whether it struck him a great Blow or a small one.

But to the Point: There is no better Way of finding out the proper Charge of a Gun, than by the Report it gives. If there is too much Powder and too little Shot, the Report will be a kind of a deep Roar; if too little Powder and too much Shot, it will be an insignificant, short, narrow Smack; but if it is charged properly, the Report will be a smart, shrill Clap, something resembling Thunder.

This is the Reason why the Report of a Sportsman's Gun is so different from that of a Field-Keeper's. The Field-Keeper has, or ought to have, no Shot in his Piece; the Sportsman's is properly loaded.

In short, there is a Tone in the Barrel of a Gun, and the better the Temper of the Metal is, the more shrill will be the Report, and the farther it will do Execution.

I have dwelt the longer upon this Subject, because a Gun is an ugly Weapon in the Hands of those who are either ignorant or careless, or both.

* * * * *