Chapter VI: Part 6

~Cross-bow and pistol united.~

There were cross-bows, which combined a pistol and cross-bow, the wheel-lock being placed about the centre of the handle on one side, whilst on the other was the string of the bow, and the windlass for drawing it up.

~Pike and pistol.~

Pistols were frequently introduced into the butt-end of pikes, and also, in the reign of Edward VI., in the handle of the battle-axe, the spiked club, the martlet, and other weapons, even the dagger.

~Carabines with joint.~

~Heel plate to draw out.~

In the time of Charles I. there were esclopette carbines, made with the butt to double back on a hinge, in order to get them into a holster; and a little later the butt was lengthened by drawing out the steel cap which formed its cover, now called heel plate.

~Revolvers in Charles I.~

~Double-barrelled pistols.~

In the reign of Charles I. there were also revolvers, with eight chambers to hold the charges; and in the time of Cromwell and Charles II. we find self-loading and self-priming guns. Pistols were made both double-barrelled and revolving.

~Arrows fired out of muskets, 1591.~

In Sir Richard Hawkins’ account of his voyage in the South Sea, 1591, mention is made of his shooting arrows from muskets with great success at shipping: “for the upper works of their ships being musket proof, they passed through both sides with facilitie, and wrought extraordinary disasters, which caused admiration to see themselves wounded with small shot when they thought themselves secure.” These wooden arrows were called sprites or sprightes. Lord Verulam says, “it is certain that we had in use at one time for sea fight short arrows which they call sprights, without any other head save wood sharpened, which were discharged out of muskets, and would pierce through the sides of ships, when a bullet would not pierce.”

~Sprites required wads.~

Sir Richard Hawkins informs us, that in a discourse which he held with the Spanish General, Michael Angell, the latter demanded, “for what purpose served the little short arrowes which we had in our shippe, and those in great quantity. I satisfied him that they were for our muskets. Hereof they prooved to profit themselves after; but for that they wanted the tampkins, which are first to be driven home, before the arrow be put in, and as they understood not the secret, they rejected them as uncertaine, and therefore not to be used; but of all the shot used now adayes, for the annoying of an ennemie in fight by sea, few are of greater moment for many respects, which I hold not convenient to treat of in public.”

Thus it appears that bullets of metal, have been fired out of bows and slings, stone balls out of guns, and arrows from muskets.

The following are the names of different descriptions of small arms, viz:--

Hand-cannon
Hand-gun
Arquebus
Caliver
Petronel
Scorpion
Dragon
Musketoon
Hague
Demi-hague
Esclopette
Currier
Fusil
Hand-mortar
Blunderbuss
Musket
Pistol
Dag
Tack

THE BAYONET.

~Pointed stake.~

It was common with archers to place a long pointed stake in the ground to protect themselves against cavalry. On the arquebus replacing the bow the same practice was continued.

~Pike.~

From the earliest ages it had been customary to arm some of the infantry with pikes, and in the middle ages when cavalry was so much employed in armies, it was found impossible to dispense with this weapon; for some time after the introduction of fire-arms, only a portion of the infantry were armed with them, and the remainder were pikemen. The proportion of each varied at different times, from one half to two thirds, but as the proportion of musketeers increased it became necessary to contrive some method, by which they could defend themselves.

~_Marlets-de-fer_ with touch.~

~Rest, with touch.~

~Swines’ feathers.~

In the latter part of the reign of James I., some attempts were made to convert the musketeer’s rest into a defence against cavalry. _Marlets-de-fer_ and small pole-axes had a touch enclosed in them, which by touching a spring opened a small valve and sprung out. The musket rest, instead of having a wooden shaft, was now made of a thin tube of iron, like these pole-axes covered with leather, and armed with the touch. Rests thus armed were said to contain Swedish or Swines’ feathers. It was found however that the musketeer could not do his duty when armed with musket, sword, and rest, (especially if he had a Swedish feather to manage with them) which led to the abandonment of the rest during the Protectorate.

~Sword stuck in muzzle.~

~Bayonets in France, 1671.~

To remedy the inconvenience of a Musketeer being compelled to draw his sword and defend himself after the discharge of his piece, and to render him more competent to act against the pikemen, a long thin rapier blade fixed into a handle, and carried in a sheath called a Swine’s feather, was drawn out of its scabbard, and fixed into the muzzle of his gun, which gave him a weapon of great length. (Plate 19, fig. 11.). And this dagger or sword, stuck into the muzzle of the gun, gave origin to the bayonet, which was first made at Bayonne, and introduced into the French army in 1671.

~Swords discontinued, 1745.~

~Improved bayonet.~

~Bayonet in Flanders, William III.~

~Bayonet at Killicrankie.~

Swords in general were left off in the battalion companies ever since the year 1745, and about 1762 by the grenadiers. As a still further improvement the bayonet was made to fit on to the side of the barrel, so as to leave it clear. An early application of the improved bayonet took place in the campaigns of William III., in Flanders. Three French regiments thus armed, marched with fixed bayonets, and one of them against the 25th regiment. Lieut-Colonel Maxwell ordered his men to screw their bayonets into their muzzles to receive them; but to his great surprise when they came within the proper distance, the French threw in such a heavy fire, as for the moment to stagger his people, who by no means expected such a greeting, not conscious how it was possible to fire with fixed bayonets. Macaulay in the 3rd volume of his History, states “That at the battle of Killicrankie, the King’s army being drawn up in position, the Highlanders advanced to the attack, and immediately after having delivered their fire, threw away their muskets and rushed on to the charge with Claymores. It took the regular musketeer two or three minutes to alter his missile weapon into one with which he could encounter an enemy hand to hand, and during this time the battle of Killicrankie had been decided.” Mackay therefore ordered all his bayonets to be so made that they might be screwed upon the barrel.

~Bayonets, Marsaglia, 1693, and Spiers, 1703.~

~Pike abolished, 1703.~

~Earl Orrery in favour of pike versus musket, 1677.~

Bayonets were employed by Marshal Catinat at the battle of Marsaglia, when the slaughter was immense. Also at the battle of Spiers, in 1703. Thus improved, the bayonet came into general use, and the pike was abolished in France by Royal Ordinance 1703, with the advice of Marshal Vauban. Before the introduction of the improved bayonet, Lord Orrery, in 1677, thus speaks in favour of the pike:--“But what need I more say of the usefulness of the pike above the musket, than that all persons of quality carry the pike which they would not do unless it had adjudgedly the honour to be the noblest weapon, since the bravest choose and fight with it. I wish our companies consisted of fewer shots and more pikes, for they are not only always in readiness but need no ammunition, which cannot be said of the musket which requires powder, bullet, and match, and in wet or windy weather often disappoints the service.”

~M. Mallet, pike versus musket, 1684.~

Mons. Mallet in his “Travaux de Mars,” speaks lightly of the “mousquetaires,” without pikemen; he says, “A horse wounded by a fire-arm is only more animated, but when he finds himself pierced by a pike, all the spurs in the world will not make him advance.”

~Gen. Loyd, pike versus bayonet, 1766.~

~Pike recently discontinued.~

Even so recently as about ninety-two years ago, and ninety-five years after the introduction of the improved bayonet, General Loyd in his history of the war in Germany, recommends the abandonment of the system of arming the whole of the infantry with fire-arms, “which he says are useful only in _defensive_ warfare, and even then not more than one shot in four hundred takes effect.” For many years after pikes were discontinued by our infantry, the officers carried a short one, and the sergeants only gave up their halberts within the last thirty years. The soldiers of artillery when in Holland under the late Duke of York, carried short pikes for the defence of their field guns.

ACCOUTREMENTS AND AMMUNITION.

~Armament of infantry soldier.~

~Bandolier.~

~Bandolier abandoned in France, 1684.~

~Flask resumed.~

~Patrons.~

~Cartridges.~

Besides his matchlock, the soldier carried a powder horn or flask, a ball bag, slow match, a rest, and a sword. The two last changed for a bayonet. In order to accelerate the loading, a large leather belt, called bandolier, was worn over the shoulder. To this were hung twelve wooden cases, each of which contained one charge, with a case of finer powder for priming, and at the lower end a bag for balls. This system was soon found to be inconvenient, as the cases were apt to get entangled in passing through woods, &c. It was therefore abandoned in France in 1684, and the flask resumed. Sir James Turner, speaking of the pistol, says, “All horsemen should always have the charges of their pistols ready in patrons, the powder made up compactly in paper, and the ball tied to it with a piece of pack thread.” In this description we have evidently the cartridge, though not expressed by name. It is a curious fact that these were first confined to the cavalry, and that the general adoption of the cartridge was not earlier than the common use of the modern firelock. The Patron was an upright semi-cylindrical box of steel, with a cover moving on a hinge, filled with a block of wood with five perforations, to hold as many pistol cartridges.

~Earl of Orrery in favour of pouches.~

The Earl of Orrery, in 1677, writes, “I am, on long experience, an enemy to bandoliers, but a great approver of boxes of cartridges for them, as by biting off the bottom of the cartridge, you charge your musket for service with one ramming. I would have these boxes of tin, because they are not so apt to break as the wooden ones are, and do not, in wet weather, or lying in the tents, relax. Besides, I have often seen much prejudice in the use of bandoliers, which are often apt to take fire. They commonly wound, and often kill he that wears them, and those near him, for likely if one take fire, all the rest do in that collar. They often tangle when they have fired, and are falling off by the flanks of the files of the intervals to get into the rear to load again. Their rattling in the night often discovers the designs; and if the weather be windy, their rattling also often hinders the soldier from hearing, and, consequently, obeying the word of command. Whereas the cartridge boxes exempt those who use them from all these dangers and prejudices. They enable the soldier to fire more expeditiously. They are also usually worn about the waist of the soldier, the skirts of whose doublet and whose coat doubly defend them from all rain, that does not pierce both, and being worn close to his body, the heat thereof keeps the powder dryer. Besides all this, whoever loads his musket with cartridges, is sure the bullet will not drop out, though he takes his aim under breast high; whereas those soldiers on service who take the bullets out of their mouths, which is the nimblest way, or out of their pouches, seldom put any paper, tow, or grass, to ram the bullet in, whereby if they fire above breast high the bullet passes over the head of the enemy, and if they aim low the bullet drops out, ere the musket is fired, and it is to this that I attribute the little execution I have seen musketeers do in time of fight, though they fired at great battalions, and those also reasonably near.”

The preceding article on Portable Fire-Arms is principally compiled
from “Military Antiquities,” by Francis Grose; “Ancient Armour and
Weapons of War,” by John Hewitt; “Engraved Illustrations of Ancient
Armour,” by Joseph Skelton, F.S.A.; “A Critical Enquiry into Ancient
Armour,” by Sir R. S. Meyrick, Knt.; and “Deane’s Manual of
Fire-arms.”

HISTORY OF THE RIFLE.

~Invention of the rifle.~

We shall now direct our attention to the rifle,--its invention is ascribed to Gaspard Zollner, of Vienna, towards the end of the fifteenth century.

~1466.~

The first society for firing with the arquebuss was founded at Bâle, in Switzerland.

~Rifles at Leipsic, 1498.~

In the practice of firing at a mark, at Leipsic, 1498, the greater part of the Sharpshooters or Marksmen, were armed with the Rifles.

~Rifles used first for amusement.~

At first, Rifle arms were used only for amusement, and sometimes for the defence of places, but very rarely as weapons of war in the field.

~Rifles used in war.~

Their employment in a campaign only dates from a little before the middle of the seventeenth century.

~Landgrave of Hesse, 1631.~

In 1631, the Landgrave William of Hesse had three companies of Chasseurs, armed with rifles.

~Elector Maximilian, 1645.~

In 1645, the Elector Maximilian of Bavaria formed three regiments of Chasseurs, armed with rifles which he intended to employ principally in the minor operations of war.

~Frederick William of Prussia, 1674.~

In 1647, Frederick William of Prussia, in his campaign on the Rhine, distributed in each company of infantry, some light infantry and Riflemen.

~Frederick the Great in Seven Years’ War.~

~By Austrians ditto.~

Frederick the Great, in order to counterbalance the Austrian Light Troops, more particularly the Tyrolese Marksmen, whose fire was exceedingly deadly, felt obliged during the seven years’ war to add a company of trained light infantry to the effective strength of each battalion.

~Rifles in France, 1674.~

In France the Cavalry were supplied with rifles before the Infantry. Towards 1674 Louis XIV. created some squadrons of Cavalry armed with “Carabines rayées.” The name was given in France to all arms which were grooved, and it also served for the name of the corps which were first armed with them, viz., “Carabins.”

~Rifles in English Life Guards.~

In 1680 eight rifle carbines were carried in each troop of English Life Guards.

~Rifles in Sweden, 1691.~

In 1691 the Non-Commissioned Officers of the Swedish Dragoons received the rifled carabin, and in 1700 those of the Prussian Cavalry received the same rifled arms.

~Experiments in England, 1776.~

Experiments were tried with rifled small arms in England in the year 1776.

We read in the Scots’ Magazine, vol. 36, that “the Guards are every day practising the use of the Rifle Gun in Hyde Park. On Saturday, April 27th, 1776, their Majesties attended a Review of the Rifle-men yesterday, and were much pleased with the dexterity of the officer, who loaded and fired several times in a minute, and hit the mark each time. He lies upon his back when he discharges his piece.”

~Rifles in Austria, 1778.~

Austria kept 2000 Sharpshooters, having double carbines, which were supplied with a crotch to rest them upon while shooting. Only one of the barrels was rifled.

~Rifles in French infantry, 1793.~

In 1793 the first model carbine for French Infantry was made at Versailles; at the same time the model for Cavalry was also fixed. Rifles were soon abandoned in the French Army; they deemed them of more trouble than profit.

~Rifles, English, 1794.~

In 1794 the English adopted the Rifle, which, I fancy, was first used by a Battalion of the 60th, or Royal American Regiment.

~Rifles numerous in Austria, 1796.~

In 1796 there were in the Austrian Army 15 Battalions of Light Infantry, the greater part of whom were armed with Rifles.

~Rifles for the 95th regt., 1800.~

In 1800, Rifles were placed in the hands of the 95th Regiment, now the Rifle Brigade of four Battalions. These Rifles weighed about 10¹⁄₂lbs. each, with the sword. They were sighted for 100 and 200 yards, with seven grooves, having a quarter turn in the length of the barrel, which was about 2 feet 6 inches, the length of the Rifle 3 feet 10 inches, weight of sword 1lb., diameter of bore ·623. The locks were excellent, and had a detent, to prevent the nose of the sear catching at half cock, and it had a bolt, to prevent its going off at half cock. The ball was spherical, and driven in with a mallet, which was afterwards dispensed with, and a greased patch substituted.

~Rifle ball in two sizes.~

~Range of English rifle.~

During the Peninsular War, our Riflemen were supplied with balls of two sizes, the easiest fitting being designed for use where celerity of loading was required. Baker, who made these Rifles, says in his Work, 1825, “I have found 200 yards the greatest range I could fire to any certainty. At 300 yards I have fired very well at times, when the wind has been calm. At 400 yards, and at 500 yards, I have frequently fired, and have sometimes struck the object, though I have found it to vary much.”

~Rifles in 7th and 10th Dragoons.~

Colonel Dickson, R.A., says, “In the early part of the present century, there was also introduced a rifle-arm for cavalry. The barrel 20 inches, calibre 20 bore, grooves 7, having the same pitch as those for the infantry; the 7th and 10th light cavalry were the only regiments armed with them, but they were soon discontinued from being considered as unfit for cavalry service.”

~Brunswick rifle.~

The Brunswick rifle was introduced in 1836. Weight with bayonet 11lbs. 5oz., length of barrel 2ft. 6-in., bore ·704. Two deep spiral grooves with one turn in the length of the barrel. Sighted for 100, 200, and 300 yards. Bullet spherical and belted, diameter ·696. Weight of bullet 557 grains. The shooting of this arm was superior to our first rifle, although the loading was not so easy as was desired, and a great disadvantage existed in the bullet and cartridge being separate in the soldier’s pouch, the grooves were deeper and rounder than those of the ordinary rifle, the projecting zone of the ball was made to fit the grooves, the ball was wrapped in a linen patch dipped in grease. It was found that, although the rifle loaded easily at first, after constant firing the barrel became very foul, rendering loading nearly as difficult as under the old system of the indented ball. The belt on the ball caused considerable friction while passing through the air. (Plate 20, fig. 1).

~Merits of the Brunswick rifle.~

By a committee of officers assembled at Enfield, it was determined that all firing with the Brunswick beyond 400 yards was too wild to give a correct angle of elevation. It was tested at Antwerp in 1844, in an experiment extending to 44,000 rounds, and declared to be the worst tried.

~Improvements from France.~

From France chiefly have proceeded most of the modern improvements in fire-arms.

~French at discount without rifles.~

~Captain Delvigne’s first step to restore rifles in France.~

~The French desired to be on an equality with Arabs.~

~Expansion by chamber.~

~Defects of chambered rifle.~

~Poncharra Delvigne rifle 1833.~

The original French rifle (like our own) was loaded by force with a strong ramrod and mallet, and they found that it gave precision with diminution of range. For these reasons during the early campaigns of the French Revolution, the rifle was given up in the French army; but as their Chasseurs were found to be unequally matched against those of other armies, who surpassed them in accuracy as marksmen, a series of experiments were carried on at different times, with a view to its reintroduction into their service. No satisfactory result was obtained until the occupation of Algeria, when Mons. Delvigne, of the Guarde Royale, took the first step in its restoration. In the flying wars kept up against them by Abd-el-Kader, they found that masses of their men were struck by Arab balls at distances where the French muskets were apparently powerless, and this they afterwards found arose from the long matchlocks of their enemies being fired at a much greater elevation than was ever thought of by European troops. In order to put themselves on an equality with their enemies, Mons. Delvigne showed in 1828 how the rifle bullet could be made to enter the piece easily, and quit it in a forced state; a method of loading as easy and simple as that of a smooth-bore arm. Expansion was obtained by the introduction of a chamber in the bore, which furnished an annular surface to receive the bullet, and on its being struck a small blow with the rammer it was expanded into the grooves. (Plate 20, fig. 2). The objection to the chambered rifle, was that after frequently firing, a residuum collected which eventually left the powder less room in the chamber, and of necessity it then reached above the shoulder of the latter, so that the ball resting upon the powder instead of upon the shoulder of the chamber, was not so readily dilated by the strokes of the ramrod into the grooves. To remedy this defect the wooden sabot and greased patch (plate 20, fig. 3) were suggested by Colonel Poncharra, in 1833, introduced into the French army 1839, and employed in Algeria, 1840, but several inconveniences attended its use.

~Carabine à Tige, 1842.~

~Defects of Tige.~

~Tige introduced, 1846.~

Colonel Thouvenin endeavoured to overcome these difficulties by fixing at the bottom of the bore an iron shank, around which was placed the powder. This stem, (plate 20, fig. 4) stopping the bullet, allowed it to be struck in such a manner as to cause the lead to penetrate into the grooves. There is much fouling at the breech, and around the pillar of these rifles. They are difficult to clean, the soldier having to carry an instrument for this purpose. The Chasseurs and Zouaves of the African Army were armed with the tige in 1846.

At first a spherical ball had been used, and then a solid cylindro-conical bullet was resorted to; (Plate 20, fig. 6.) Messrs. Delvigne and Minié having long previously experimented with hollow cylindro-conical projectiles.

~Minié iron cup.~

~French army 1850.~

Some years after these experiments, Captain Minié proposed the adoption of a bullet which should receive its expansion by placing an iron cup in the hollow of the base, which should be driven up by the gas, and force the walls of the cavity outwards, thus making them enter the grooves. (Plate 20, fig. 7.) In 1850 the Fusil rayé with balle à culot was put into the hands of some French regiments of the line, and since then the French Imperial Guard have been armed with the old musket rifled, and a hollow bullet without a cup.

At present it is understood that the French are rifling all their smooth bore arms, and the Russians are doing the same.

~Prussian. army.~

~Russian riflemen.~

~Austrian riflemen.~

~Belgium.~

~Portugal.~

The Prussians have many thousands of their infantry armed with a breech-loading long range Rifle. The Russian Army is to have fifty-four rifle regiments, with a rifle company to each other regiment of Infantry. The Austrians are busy at work, according to their means. The Tyrol has always supplied them with a large number of marksmen. The Belgians are, I believe, universally armed with rifles, and even the little Kingdom of Portugal has ordered 28,000 rifles from Belgium.

~Conoidal bullet, with Brunswick.~

~Minié rifle, introduced, 1851.~

~Performance and angle of Minié.~

Subsequent to the French experiments with the conoidal bullet, and the great results obtained over the spherical from it, it was proposed to adapt a conoidal bullet to the Brunswick Rifle. (Plate 20, fig 5.) This was done as an experiment, and succeeded very well, but at the same time the new arm, called the Minié pattern, 1851, was also tried, and the shooting exhibited greater accuracy with this latter arm. Nothing further was done with the Brunswick rifle and conoidal bullet; and the (then called) “new regulation Minié,” was introduced into the service by the late Marquis of Anglesea, Master-General of Ordnance, with the approval of the late Duke of Wellington. Its weight with bayonet, was 10lbs. 8³⁄₄ozs., bore ·702, four spiral grooves, with one turn in 6 feet 6-in., powder, 2¹⁄₂ drs., bullet, 680 grs., with iron cup, diameter of bullet, ·690, windage, ·012. When the axis is parallel to the ground at 4 feet 6-in. above it, the first graze is about 177 yards, and the angle of elevation at 800 yards, is 3° 25.

~Consequences of improvements in military rifles.~

A few years previous to the Russian war, rifles had attained to a degree of improvement in structure and adaptability to the general purpose of war, which threatened subversion to the established notions of the military world.

~Probable effect on artillery.~

~On cavalry.~

~Minié in Kaffir war.~

~Bullet improved.~

The artillery arm was menaced in its long rested monopoly of range and precision, with an equilibrium in hands it had never dreamed to find it; one which not alone would curb the wonted dash of field batteries to within the “shortest range,” but also impress a more than wonted respect upon the best led and most daring cavalry, for even the thinnest formation of that arm, which it had hitherto been taught to despise. The Minié was first used in the Kaffir war, and next at Alma and Inkerman, when it proved that the gallant Marquis had advanced a step in the right direction; who had ordered 28,000, but quarrels taking place among the contractors this order was never completed. The accuracy of firing from the Minié was improved by altering the form of the bullet from conoidal to cylindro-conoidal, (plate 20, fig. 8.) and the iron cup from hemispherical to a conical shape with a hole in the apex.

~Lord Hardinge’s desire for improvement.~

~Experiments at Enfield.~

Lord Hardinge, succeeding to the post of Master-General, and after to that of Commander-in-Chief, zealously followed out the prosecution of the now becoming fixed idea, the general adoption for British infantry, of a pattern rifle-musket, which should combine lightness with solidity, precision, and superior range. Lord Hardinge opened competition to the leading British gun makers, when the following sent in muskets for trial, viz:--Purdy, Westley Richards, Lancaster, Wilkinson, and Greener. The Minié pattern, (51), and Brunswick, (36), were also subjected to a course of trial before the committee assembled at Enfield, in 1852, for the purpose of determining the best description of fire-arm for military service.

~Merits of the Brunswick.~

The Brunswick rifle showed itself to be very much inferior in point of range to every arm hitherto tried. The loading was so difficult, that it is wonderful how the rifle regiments can have continued to use it so long, the force required to ram down the ball was so great as to render a man’s hand much too unsteady for accurate shooting. Colonel Gordon, says, “It should be noticed here with the exception of Mr. Wilkinson, every one of the makers changed either his musket or projectile during the trials, thereby causing them to be protracted much beyond the time originally intended.”

~All had reduced bores.~

~Elongated bullets.~

~Reversed cartridge.~

~Best shooting from short rifle.~

~Advantage of small bore.~

~Disadvantages of small bore.~

The diameter of the bore of all the new muskets was less than that hitherto in use, all the bullets were elongated and had auxiliaries for expansion, being metallic, or in one case a horn plug, one pattern had cannelures and the whole required the cartridge to be reversed in loading. It is worthy of remark that the best shooting at these trials was from a short rifle made at Enfield, which was named the artillery carbine, but not the one now used by the Royal Artillery. The barrel was only 2 feet 6-in. long, and the projectile cylindro-conoidal, with an iron cup weighing 620 grains; thus proving that great length of barrel is not absolutely necessary in a rifle; but a certain length of barrel is required to fire in double ranks, and so that the weapon may be effectually used as a pike. With a small bore, a greater number of rounds of ammunition may be carried, greater penetration, velocity, lower trajectory, and more accuracy, than with larger projectiles of equal weight. The alleged disadvantages of small bore are, the slender form of cartridge and the smaller hole made in a man’s body, as stated to be proved in the case of wild animals, in proof of which it is said that they are found to run further when wounded with a small ball, than they do with a large one; but this reasoning does not seem applicable to the human race, for it is presumed that few men would be found willing to move far when wounded by a musket ball, whether the hole in their body was ·702 or ·530 of an inch in diameter.

~Objection to reversing the cartridge.~

An absurd objection was stated as to reversing the cartridge, viz:--that drill with blank would be performed in a different manner to firing ball, and that in action the soldier would forget to reverse his cartridge, and put in the ball first. As we now always perform our drill, and as our present blank cartridges require to be reversed or will not ignite, this objection is removed. It also was said that mice, rats, &c., &c., would eat off the lubricating mixture!!

It was proposed to give the Enfield, (1853,) a back sight to 900 yards, when an outcry was raised against the monstrous proposition of giving to every common soldier a delicately made back sight, whether he knew how to use it or not!!! and those rifles first issued, were only sighted to 300 yards.

~The Enfield rifle.~

At the conclusion of the trials at Enfield, in August, 1852, two rifles were made at the Royal Manufactory, in which were embodied the improvements and alterations suggested by the experience obtained during the course of the trials, and which was hoped would possess the necessary requirements for a military weapon, and which proved superior to the Minié, the Brunswick, and all those presented for trial by the different manufacturers.

~Dimensions, &c., of Enfield.~

This beautiful rifle though 2¹⁄₂lbs. less than the old musket, is fully as strong, and as capable of rough usage. Weight, including bayonet, 9lbs. 3 ozs., bore, ·577, length of barrel, 3 feet 3-in., weight of barrel, 4lbs. 6 ozs., three grooves with spiral of one turn in 6 feet 6-in.; the barrel to be fastened to the stock by bands. The bayonet to be fixed by means of a locking ring. The lock to have a swivel. The bullet was of a pattern suggested by Mr. Pritchett. (Plate 20, fig. 9.)

~Attempts to improve the bullet.~

~Description of Pritchett.~

Lord Hardinge, desirous to improve the projectile, and if possible to get rid of the cup, having requested the leading gun makers to lay any suggestions before the small arms committee, none were submitted but one by Mr. Wilkinson, which was not a compound. It was solid with two deep cannelures, but it lost its accuracy when made up into a cartridge, and made very wild practice beyond 300 yards. (Plate 20, fig. 10.) Subsequently a bullet was proposed by Mr. Pritchett, being cylindro-conoidal in form, with a small hollow at the base, which was made more to throw the centre of gravity forward than to obtain expansion thereby. This bullet weighed 520 grains, or 24 guage, and excellent practice was made with it at Enfield, from 100, to 800 yards, and it was accordingly introduced into the service, to the suppression of the Minié, with iron cup; and for which Mr. Pritchett, received £1,000.

~Lancaster smooth _bore_ rifles.~

Shortly after the establishment of the School of Musketry, in June, 1853, twenty Enfield rifles were sent down for trial in competition with the Minié, and also with “Lancaster’s smooth bore eliptical rifle, with increasing spiral and freed at the breech,” when the Enfield was found to be superior to both. It is stated that Mr. Lancaster’s invention is intended to overcome the inconvenience attendant on the wearing out the rifle ridges, by the ramrod, &c.; these rifles are also easily cleaned, the difference in width between the major and minor axis of the ellipse was, ¹⁄₁₀₀ of an inch.

~Engineer Carbine.~

Carbines on this principle are now carried by the Royal Engineers, and shoot well, and by some persons are thought to be superior to the Enfield, 1853; they fire the same ammunition, and there is no question but that their firing is much more accurate from using the improved wooden plug bullet.

~Failure of the Pritchett.~

In May, 1855, the ammunition was found to be in a most unsatisfactory state and unfit to be used, there being bullets of various diameters in many of the packages of the cartridges. The correct size of the Pritchett bullet viz., ·568, was found to produce accurate shooting, at 600 yards, while bullets of a smaller diameter fired very badly.

~Return to iron cup.~

To get out of this difficulty, Colonel Hay recommended the application of the iron cup to the bullet, which was approved, when more uniform expansion resulted and greater accuracy.

Thus by using an auxiliary to expansion there is a margin left to cover any trifling inaccuracy in manufacture, in diameter of either bullet or bore.

~Woolwich account for bad _ammunition_.~

The Woolwich authorities stated that they had seven dies at work making bullets, and which were made small at first as they gradually wore larger; when any one die became too large it was destroyed, and replaced by a smaller one. To this cause they imputed the failure of our Pritchett ammunition. It was afterwards suggested from the School of Musketry, to procure expansion by using a wooden plug, and after most extensive experiments, this was found to be superior to any description of bullet yet tried at Hythe, and the wooden plug has accordingly been established for the British army. (Plate 20, fig. 11.)

~On expansion.~

Uniform accuracy mainly results from the bullet continuing to receive a sufficient and uniform expansion into the grooves, so that the projectiles get such an amount of rotation as shall last until they have reached the object fired at. The more perfect the expansion, the less the accumulation of fouling and consequently accuracy is further increased.

The Enfield has frequently been fired to 200 rounds and the loading continued easy.

~Progressive grooving 1858.~

Early in 1858, the regulation rifle, (53), was changed from grooves of uniform, ·014 in depth, to ·005 at muzzle, increasing in depth to ·015 at the breech; while new, these rifles shoot well, but they require increased elevation at long ranges. How far these shallow grooves will answer, or how long it will take to convert these aims into smooth bores at the muzzle, by the continued friction of the ramrod, remains to be seen.

~Origin of progressive grooving.~

~Advantages.~

Captain Panot, of the French service, states, “it is but a few years since all our smooth bore barrels were reamed so that they would carry the spherical ball of ·669, instead of ·641. It was afterwards determined to convert these arms into rifles. To prevent weakening the reamed up barrels, M. Tamisier proposed to vary the depth of the grooves, making them deeper at the breech than at the muzzle.” Grooves thus made, are said to have a greater accuracy of fire from keeping the ball perfectly tight as it leaves the bore and destroying all windage at the muzzle. This is called “progressive grooving.” Rifles upon this principle require to be fired at an increased elevation, attributed to the greater amount of friction experienced by the bullet while passing down the barrel.

~Short Enfield.~

Rifle regiments and all serjeants of infantry have been furnished with a weapon requiring the same ammunition as the regulation arm, but six inches shorter, being mounted in steel, with a sword bayonet.

~Royal Navy rifle.~

A five “grooved progressive” carbine has recently been given to the Royal Marine Artillery and the Royal Navy, with the same bore as the Enfield.

RIFLED BREECH-LOADERS.

~Early guns loaded at the breech.~

It is worthy of notice that, while numerous attempts are now making to perfect the breech-loader for sporting as well as military purposes, our early cannon and first hand guns were loaded at the breech, and if all mechanical difficulties could be overcome, the breech-loading principle for portable fire-arms would deserve the preference. We can easily understand why it did not continue in favour in early days, as this mode includes a great deal of perfection in mechanical workmanship, and to which the ancient gun maker was a stranger.

~Disadvantages of breech-loaders.~

The great argument against breech-loaders as military weapons is the expense, their intricate construction, the escape of gas, and the probable waste of ammunition, in the hands of an uneducated soldier. It may be briefly answered.

~1st. As to expense.~

1st.--As to expense, the most destructive weapon, by preventing and curtailing war, must in the long run be the cheapest.

~2nd. As to intricacy.~

2nd.--As to intricacy of construction, the soldier is the user, not the maker of his gun; it matters not how delicate the mechanism of a watch may be, the only question is, does it continue to go well!! And who dare say that the brains of man shall never suggest a simple mode of construction. Of course anything fragile would be totally unfit for military purposes. The escape of gas has been entirely overcome.

~3rd. As to waste of ammunition.~

3rd.--As to waste of ammunition, is it absolutely necessary that a soldier should remain uneducated? Are not soldiers men? And men can be taught almost anything, or are they incapable of being taught? Does a soldier fire how, when and where he chooses? Is it too high an aspiration that the British army should carry the best arm that can be made, to be placed in the hands of a taught and skilful soldier, acting under the guidance and control of intelligent officers?

~Breech-loaders highly improved.~

~Ammunition the difficulty.~

As far as the arm only is concerned, breech-loaders have now (1860) attained a high degree of perfection, as is proved by the deserved celebrity of that made by Mr. Westley Richards. The only remaining difficulty is one of ammunition. Loose powder cannot be employed in loading with a breech as it can with a muzzle-loader. We are up to this time under the necessity of introducing the whole of the cartridge, this of course augments fouling and lessens accuracy; there is also increased difficulty in producing ignition through the fold of the cartridge paper.

~Capt. Brown’s compressed powder.~

Recently a most ingenious mode of compressing the grains of powder contained in a charge into one mass, so that every description of rifle may be rapidly loaded without any paper, has been invented by Captain Brown, R. N., and I have every hope and confidence that the only remaining breech-loading difficulty may now be considered overcome.

~Advantages of breech-loaders.~

~1st. Celerity.~

~2nd. Load lying down.~

~3rd. Easily cleaned.~

~4th. Solid ball.~

The advantages of breech-loaders, are, 1st.--Celerity of fire, about ten rounds a minute have been attained. 2nd.--The soldier can load while lying flat on the ground. 3rd.--The barrel can be easily cleaned and examined as to its state. 4th.--A solid ball can be fired, and with less windage.

~Self capping.~

Various modes of self capping have been brought forward, but that by Maynard seems to merit the preference; time is further economized, and the powers of the breech-loader thereby increased.

~Cavalry have breech-loaders.~

Our cavalry regiments in India, are partially armed with breech-loading rifles, and all their pistols are rifled, and upon the tige principle.

~Rifles universal in English army.~

The whole of our Guards, regular Infantry, Royal Marines, Militia, and Royal Engineers, are armed with rifles, and the Carabine used by the Royal Artillery, is also rifled. All our Colonial corps are supplied with rifled arms, with the exception of the Native corps, serving in the East Indies and Ceylon.

~In larger numbers.~

~Taught to use.~

~Prizes.~

Thus rifles are introduced in larger numbers and of better quality in the armies of England, in proportion to their numbers, than amongst any other nation. While more care and expense is incurred in qualifying our soldiers efficiently to use them. In illustration of which, it is only needful to call attention to the simple fact that £20,000 per annum is distributed as a stimulus to the marksmen of the British army, for which boon all honour to our Royal Commander-in-Chief.

~Explosive shells.~

The idea has recently been revived to increase the destructive powers of Infantry, by furnishing them with shells, with which they may explode ammunition waggons, artillery limbers, &c., &c., to the distance of 1,000 yards. Captain Norton, Mr. Dyer, Colonel Jacobs, and Mr. Whitworth, have directed their minds to this most important subject.

ON RIFLING.

It has been stated that amongst the different gun makers who assembled at Woolwich, for the carrying on of experiments in 1851, no two agreed upon any one thing; and in 1860, it may still be averred, with almost equal truth, and that it yet remains an unsettled question as to the form, width, depth, number or degree of spirality of the grooves, as also the harmony which should subsist between the grooves, diameter of bore, the form and weight of projectile, and the quality and quantity of charge.

~Description of Rifles.~

~Advantages of a rifle.~

Robins, in 1742, says, “rifles though well known on the continent, being but little used in England, it is necessary to give a short description of their make. The rifle has its cylinder cut with a number of spiral channels, so that it is in reality a female screw, varying from the fabric of common screws, only in this, that its threads or rifles are less deflected and approach more to a straight line.” The advantage of a rifle (with a round bullet), is that the axis of rotation not being in any accidental position, as in a smooth bore, but coincident with the line of its flight, it follows that the resistance on the fore part of the bullet is equally distributed round the centre of gravity, and acts with an equal force on every side of the line of direction, and also should the resistance be greater on one side of the bullet than the other from irregularities on its surface, as this part continually shifts its position round the line in which it is proceeding, the deflections which this irregularity would occasion are neutralized. With an elongated projectile rifling also prevents it from rotating round its shorter axis.

~Rifling invented in Germany.~

~Rifles used 1498.~

~Straight grooves.~

It is to the artizans of Germany, that the rifle owes its origin, as at the close of the fifteenth century barrels with straight grooves were used by the citizens of Leipsic, at target practice, in 1498, and the invention of grooving or rifling fire-arms is generally supposed to be the result more of accident than theory. In Dean’s Manual of fire-arms, it is stated that, “the idea of grooving arms in the direction of the axis of the barrel to receive the residium of the powder, and thereby, not only facilitate the loading, but increase both the bite or forcing of the ball, by impressing upon it the grooves, and thus maintain it during its passage through the barrel in a direction more in harmony with the line of fire, was doubtless a conception based upon no previous theory or practice now to be traced, but was formed in that suggestiveness which in the individual founds for itself a theory based upon the likelihood of possible result. Upon trial also of the straight grooves a greater precision for short distances would have been observed than with the smooth bore.” This must of itself therefore have led to the establishment of a certain grade of theory which it was endeavoured to amplify by various means, such as increasing the number of grooves, then of changing the inclination of grooves from the straight line to the spiral.

To deem that the practised crack “shots and armourers of a time when target practice was the constant recreation of the citizen, and his pride to excel in, were so brainless as to conceive no theory, unelaborated though it may have been, and that all their even now admired efforts in Germany, were the products of mere accident, is therefore scarcely a rational supposition.”

~Spiral grooves, by Koster, of Nuremberg in 1522.~

It is stated that Koster, of Nuremburg, in 1522, first suggested giving a spiral form to the grooves, and experience proved that much greater accuracy of shooting was the result.

~Damer of Nuremberg, 1552.~

In 1552, Damer, of Nuremburg, made some great improvements in rifles, but we are not aware of their precise nature.

~Koster of Nuremberg, 1620.~

Koster, of Nuremburg, who died 1630, by some authorities is said to have discovered that straight grooves did not fulfil the intentions of their inventor, and to have been the first who suggested spiral grooves in 1620.

~Robins first explained action of grooves.~

~Robins structure of rifles.~

~Modes of loading.~

The important stage next arrived at was the scientific explanation of the true value of spiral grooves. The honor of this entirely belongs to our countryman, Benjamin Robins, who in his Principles of Gunnery, gives a complete and satisfactory explanation of the action of the grooves in determining the flight of the bullet. Robins states that “the degree of spirality, the number of threads, the depth the channel are cut down to, are not regulated according to any invariable rule, but differ according to the country where the work is performed, and the caprice of the artificer. The most usual mode of charging rifles is by forcing the ball with a strong rammer and mallet. But in some parts of Germany and Switzerland, an improvement is made by cutting a piece of very thin leather or fustian in a circular shape, somewhat larger than the bore, which being greased on one side is laid upon the muzzle with its greasy part downwards, and the bullet being placed upon it, is then forced down the barrel with it. When this is practised the rifles are generally shallow, and the bullet ought not to be too large.

~Early rifles, breech-loaders.~

As both these methods of charging rifles take up a good deal of time; the rifled barrels which have been made in England, (for I remember not to have seen it in any foreign piece,) are contrived to be charged at the breech, where the piece is made larger, and the powder and bullet are put in through an opening in the side of the barrel, which, when the piece is loaded is fitted up with a screw. And perhaps somewhat of this kind, though not in the manner now practised, would be of all others the most perfect method for the construction of these sorts of barrels.”

ON THE NUMBER, FORM &c., &c., &c., OF THE GROOVES.

~Number of grooves.~

~Degree of spirality.~

Almost every description of twist, number, &c., &c., of grooves have been tried, according to the individual tastes and theories of the manufacturers. It is absolutely necessary to have two grooves, as a single one would give a wrong direction. Rifles have been made with, from two to one hundred and thirty three grooves, and in the majority of cases, an odd seems to have been preferred to an even number. In Dean’s Manual it is stated, that “in the numerous collections of arms that have at various times come under our personal notice, some were rifled with straight, but the majority with grooves in a spiral line, sometimes with a half, sometimes a three quarter, and seldom more than a whole turn in a length of two, two and a half and three feet; deviations based upon no principle transmitted to us, but requiring nevertheless a decided research for principles upon which to establish a theory; we have also met with every one of those configurations of the spiral and form of groove, &c., &c., which have been arrogated as modern conceits and discoveries.”

~Spirality.~

Some rifles have sharp muzzle twist decreasing to the breech;--sharp breech twist decreasing to the muzzle; an increase of twist in the middle of the barrel decreasing at both extremities.

~Modification in France. 1740.~

In France a modification of the Carabine took place in 1740;--the grooves were made to begin at eight inches from the muzzle, the unrifled part being of the same calibre as the bottom of the grooves, so that the bullet might pass easily; thus also facilitating the loading of the weapon.

~Rifled only at muzzle.~

There is an old rifle in the United Service Institution, and also a barrel brought from Lucknow, (in the Model Room of the School of Musketry,) grooved only for about one foot from the muzzle, the remainder of the barrels are smooth bored.

~Degree of spirality.~

The degree of spirality is found to vary from a whole turn in 1 foot 5-in., to a whole turn in 11 feet.

~Depth of spiral.~

The depth of grooves vary from ·005 of an inch, to about ·125; and some rifles have been made with an alternate deep and shallow groove.

~Form of grooves.~

Grooves have been made round, circular, triangular, rectangular, and indefinite, alternate round and angular, elliptical, polygonal; and some cut deep only on one side.

~Proportion of groove to land.~

Some gun makers are of opinion that there should be a greater proportion of groove or furrow than of land or plain surface, because they say the ball is thus more firmly held, while others maintain that by diminishing the number of the grooves, the accuracy and range would be increased, and this has led to the opposite theory, that perhaps if anything, the plain surface of the bore should predominate over the grooved.

~Form of early grooves straight.~

The earliest rifles had two straight deep creases opposite to each other, the bullet being spherical, and furnished with small circular knots of lead, large enough to fill the creases.

~Form &c., of ancient rifles.~

The greater number of ancient rifles have a whole turn, with an odd number of deep and rounded grooves; hence we may infer these were considered the best forms.

~Objects of rifling.~

As accuracy of direction is the result of a spiral motion round an axis coincident with the flight of the bullet, communicated to it by the grooves, it is clear that the depth, number, and form of the grooves should be such as will hold the bullet firmly, and prevent all tendency to strip.

~On the degree of spirality.~

~Sharp twist and large charge not cause stripping.~

The degree of spirality should be sufficient to retain the projectile point foremost during the whole of its flight. It was at one time supposed that if the spiral turn was great, and the charge strong, the bullet would not conform, but strip, and that the same results would occur even with grooves but little curved. Unquestionably this would prove true if certain limits were to be exceeded. A false conclusion was built upon this theory, viz., that the greater the spiral turn the less the charge should be; and that therefore in rifles intended for war, the greatest initial velocity being required to produce the greatest range, the groove should have as little turn as possible; for extreme ranges have been obtained with Jacob’s, Whitworth’s, and Lancaster’s rifles; the first has a full turn in 24in. the second in 20in. These rifles perform well with 90 grains of powder, and both Whitworth’s and Lancaster’s might even fire better were the charge of powder increased to 100 grains, the recoil might be objectionable while there would be no symptoms of stripping.

~On depth of groove.~

Great depth of groove can only be hurtful, owing to the difficulty of closing up all passage to the gas, which should not be allowed to escape round the bullet, as this would cause deviation and shorten range. Deep grooves become a receptacle for fouling, are difficult to clean; and high projections must offer great resistance to the atmosphere, and particularly to a side wind.

~Patches.~

When fustian or leather are used as patches, they receive and communicate the spiral motion to the bullet, without the zone of the projectile being at all indented, but in this case the spiral must be diminished, otherwise the bullet would not turn with the grooves. If the patches be made of a thick material, the grooves should be many, broad, and not too shallow, in order to receive the folds of the patch.

~Shallow grooves best.~