Chapter D: FORENSIC, IN PRIVATE CAUSES.--I. Action for Libel (Greek: dike (11)

The Colt automatic gun, which has been adopted by the American army
and navy, and was used by the British in S. Africa, depends for its
action, similarly to the Hotchkiss, on the escape of a small portion
of the gases of explosion through a port in the barrel a short
distance from the muzzle. Figs. 17 and 18 give a plan, and side
elevation with the left side plate removed, respectively. Into the
recess in the barrel (92) just below the port fits the piston (35),
capable of slight motion round the pivot (36), by which it is attached
to the gas lever (29). The latter is a bell-crank lever pivoted at
(34), its short arm being attached at (46) by a pivot to a long link
with a cross head, termed the retracting connexion (45). This link
extends from a point close to the figures (44), where the arms of the
cross head bear against the ends of two long spiral retracting
springs, (37) and (38), contained in two tubes, (39) and (40), which
are slotted for a few inches of their length to allow the cross head
to follow up and compress the springs. (Only (38) and (40) are shown,
(37) and (39) lying in the same plane of projection.)

When the gun fires, and the bullet has passed the port, the gases
drive the piston (35) and gas lever (29) downwards, and the momentum
imparted causes them to swing back round the pivot (36), as shown by
the dotted circle. The gas lever is brought up now by the bottom plate
(91); and the retracting springs, compressed by the cross head of the
long link (45) owing to the _forward_ motion of the short arm of the
gas lever, react and drive the gas lever into its forward position
again.

The rotary movement of the gas lever is converted into a reciprocating
movement of the slide (86) by means of the gas lever connexion rod
(31) pivoted at (32) to the gas lever, and at (87) to the slide.

The slide (86) is a nearly flat bar, travelling in guides in the
receiver, extending from (14) to (87). It is slotted completely
through longitudinally for nearly the whole of its length, this slot
affording an opening through which work the cartridge extractor (82)
and carrier (21). At its rear end it engages by means of a pin (14) in
a cam slot (97) in the bottom rib of the bolt (13), and at (83) it
bears the pivot of the cartridge extractor (82). Its rear end is
enlarged below to form a cam lug (98), and on its right side are two
projections (95) and (96), which work the feed lever (66).

The feed wheel (61), over which passes the belt containing the
cartridges, is actuated by a pawl "step-by-step" gear by means of the
feed lever (66).

The carrier (21) is a long trip lever pivoted at (22), and provided
with a spring dog (23) pivoted at (24).

The bolt (13) is a cylinder with a guide rib extending from its under
surface. It is actuated by the slide by means of the pin (14) and cam
slot (97) as already stated, and is bored through to take the striker
or firing pin (18). The rear end of the latter projects slightly
beyond the rear face of the bolt, being retained in this position by
the spring (19). When this projecting end is pushed into the bolt, the
point protrudes from the front of the bolt and fires the cartridge.
The bolt, when the breech is locked, is held firm by two recoil blocks
on the receiver (not shown), as is explained later. At the front of
the bolt is an extractor (15) with a spring claw for extracting the
fired case. (This is of course quite distinct from the cartridge
extractor (82).) Ejection is effected by means of an ejector
projecting into the path of the fired case.

The firing of the gun is performed by the cylindrical hammer (6)
hollowed out in rear to contain the mainspring (7). When pushed back
and cocked as shown in fig. 18, it is held during a _portion_ of the
operations of the mechanism by two detents working independently of
each other--the sear (10) and the nose of the trigger (8). The former
is automatically released by a trip lever (not shown) as soon as the
breech is locked, leaving the hammer held by the trigger only. This is
the position shown in fig. 18. The necessity for the two detents is
explained later.

The hammer, when cocked, can also be permanently locked by the handle
lock (2) actuated by a thumb-piece on the outside of the receiver. The
air compressed in rear of the hammer, as the latter is driven back,
passes through the tube (99) to the breech; and a puff of air is
therefore blown through the barrel after every shot, clearing out
fouling and unconsumed powder, and assisting to an appreciable extent
to keep down the temperature of the barrel.

Taking the position shown in fig. 18, the hammer is only held back by
the trigger nose, the sear (10) having been released as stated above.
A belt of cartridges (not shown) has been placed on the feed-wheel,
and the cartridge next to be used after the one (not shown) now in the
breech has its rim (or base with rimless cartridges) just above the
hook on the extractor (82). If now the trigger be pulled, the hammer
flies forwards, strikes the protruding end of the firing pin, and the
cartridge fires; the gases cause the gas lever to swing round and
drive back the slide. The pin (14) working in the cam groove (97)
causes the rear of the bolt to _rise_ and clear itself from the recoil
blocks (not shown) on the receiver, and then to move rearwards
horizontally, driving the hammer back until the latter is caught and
held by the sear and trigger. In the meantime the extractor (82) has
pulled a cartridge from the belt, and, assisted by two spring
cartridge guides (80 and 81), of which only (80) is shown, deposits it
on the carrier (21); the projection (95) strikes the feed-lever (66),
and moves the feed mechanism so as to prepare to revolve the
feed-wheel and place a fresh cartridge ready for the next round; and
as the slide completes its travel backwards, the cam (98) strikes the
dog (23) and slightly depresses it (the spring (25) yielding), the
carrier and cartridge on it consequently rising a little and falling
again (this latter action is incidental only to the form of the parts,
and is not a necessity).

The retracting springs now react and pull the slide forwards; the cam
(98) strikes the dog (23), which, as the spring arrangement is of the
"non-return" class, does not yield but is depressed, and the front of
the carrier and the cartridge on it are therefore raised sharply, and
the latter placed in the path of the bolt. The bolt being now pulled
forwards, the cartridge is driven off the carrier into the breech, and
the bolt locked by the pin (14), causing the bolt to drop in front of
the recoil blocks; the carrier is pushed down flat by the advance of
the cam lug (98), the trip releases the sear (10), and the projection
(96) pushes back the feed lever, completing the action of feeding a
fresh cartridge forward. The position shown in fig. 17 is now resumed.

It is clear that were the trigger kept permanently pulled the gun
would fire immediately the bolt was locked and the sear (10)
depressed, and the action would become automatic.

The object of two detents, though now probably obvious, may here be
explained. The whole action of the gun depends upon the hammer after
it is pushed back by the bolt being _held_ back until the bolt has
gone completely forwards and locked the breech. If only the trigger
detent existed, and that were kept pressed down, the hammer, after
being pushed back by the bolt, would immediately _follow up_ the
latter, and might fire the cartridge prematurely, or fail to fire it
at all; hence the use of the sear in addition to the trigger.

To cock the lock, or work the mechanism by hand, the gas lever is
pulled round by the pin (30) provided for the purpose, and by this
means the gun is prepared for firing. A brass tongue on the end of the
belt is pushed through the opening above the feed-wheel and then
pulled from the other side of the gun as far as it will go. This
places a cartridge in front of the extractor, and if the gas lever be
now pulled right back and let go, this cartridge is placed in the
breech as already described, and the gun is ready for firing. If it be
desired to remove a belt from the feed, a button (68) is pressed and
the feed-wheel is then free to revolve backwards.

The gun is sighted with the ordinary rifle-pattern sights, up to 2000
yds. or more if required. It weighs about 40 lb., and can fire about
400 rounds per minute as usually adjusted, though this rate can be
increased. There is no means of altering the gas pressure in the field
as with the Hotchkiss.

[The diagrams have been made from drawings, by permission of the Colt
Arms Company.]

Comparing the principle of employing a recoiling barrel with that of using a portion of the gas, the advantages of the former are that the recoil is made to do useful work instead of straining the gun and mounting in its absorption; the latter system, however, has undoubtedly the advantage in simplicity of mechanism (the Hotchkiss is extraordinarily simple in construction for an automatic gun), and in the large margin of power for working the mechanism with certainty in all conditions of exposure to climate, dust, and dirt. While inferior in this respect, it is nevertheless the fact that the Maxim has proved itself in the field even in savage warfare in the roughest country to be a very efficient and powerful weapon.

The great difficulty which has to be met in all single-barrel machine guns is the heating of the barrel. The 7½ pints of water in the water-jacket of the Maxim gun are raised to boiling point by 600 rounds of rapid fire--i.e. in about 1½ minutes--and if firing be continued, about 1½ pints of water are evaporated for every 1000 rounds. Assuming that the operation is continuous, the rate of waste of energy due to heat expended on the water _alone_ is equivalent to about 20 horse-power (294 foot tons per minute). The water-jacket acts well in keeping down the temperature of the barrel; but apart from the complications entailed by its use, the provision of water for this purpose is at times exceedingly troublesome on service. In the Hotchkiss and Colt guns, which have no water-jacket, an attempt is made to meet the heating, in the one by the radiator, and in the other by a very heavy barrel.

One of the most modern types of gun is the Schwarzlose, which is manufactured at Steyr in Austria, and was adopted by the Austrian army in 1907. This weapon is remarkable for its simplicity. There are only 10 main working parts, and any of these can be replaced in a few seconds. It is operated by the gases of the explosion, has a water-jacket that allows 3000 rounds to be fired without refilling. The "life" of the gun-barrel is stated to be 35,000 rounds without serious loss of accuracy. The weight of the gun is 37.9 lb. It is a belt loader.

The Italian Perino gun, adopted in 1907, is a recoil-operated weapon, and is loaded by a metal clip. The Skoda gun, some of which type are used in Japan and China, is loaded by a hopper feed, and is gas-operated. The Bergmann gun is a belt loader, but the belt passes down a "gravity feed" an arrangement which saves a number of working parts.

One defect common to all is that it is by no means easy to proportion the fire to the target, as there are only two rates of fire, viz. rapid automatic and slow single shots. To fire a single shot requires practice, since the gun will fire some 7 shots in one _second_, and to press the trigger and remove the finger or thumb instantly, and at the same time be ready to traverse to a fresh target, requires considerable skill. The result of these difficulties is that the target when struck is often riddled with bullets when one would have sufficed. The aiming of the gun, when rapid fire is taking place, may also be difficult even on firmly fixed mountings, owing to vibration. The greater delicacy of the modern machine gun has been alluded to above.[7] Nevertheless the advantages of safety, steadiness and lightness which the automatic weapon possesses, have ensured its victory over the older type of weapon, and although the simple strong and well-tried Gatling still has its advocates, every civilized army has adopted one or more of the automatic types.

ORGANIZATION AND TACTICAL EMPLOYMENT[8]

Although machine-gun tactics are still somewhat indefinite, at least there are well-marked tendencies which have a close relation to the general tactical scheme or doctrine adopted by each of the various armies as suited to its own purposes and conditions. For many years before the South African and Manchurian wars, the machine-gun had been freely spoken of as "a diabolical weapon before which nothing could live," but this did not contribute much to the science of handling it. Most military powers, indeed, distrusted it--actuated perhaps by the remembrance of the vain hopes excited by the _canon à balles_. It was not until the second half of the war of 1904-05 that the Japanese, taught by the effective handling of the Russian machine-guns at Liao-Yang, introduced it into their field armies, and although Great Britain had provided every regular battalion with a Maxim-gun section some years before the Boer War, and a Volunteer corps, the Central London Rangers (now 12th bn. London Regiment) had maintained a (Nordenfeldt) gun section since 1882, instruction in the tactics of the weapon was confined practically to the simple phrase "the machine-gun is a weapon of opportunity." More than this, at any rate, is attempted in the drill-books of to-day.

One important point is that, whether the guns are used as an arm, in numbers, or as auxiliaries, in sections, they should be free to move without having to maintain their exact position relatively to some other unit. It was in following the infantry firing lines of their own battalion over the open that the British Maxims suffered most heavily in South Africa. Another of equal importance is that the machine guns must co-operate with other troops of their side in the closest possible way; more, in this regard, is demanded of them than of artillery, owing to their mobility and the relative ease of obtaining cover. A third factor, which has been the subject of numerous experiments, is the precise value of a machine-gun, stated in terms of infantry, i.e. how many rifles would be required to produce the fire-effect of a machine-gun. A fourth--and on this the teaching of military history is quite definite--is the need of concealment and of evading the enemy's shrapnel. These points, once the datum of efficiency of fire has been settled, resolve themselves into two conclusions--the necessity for combining independence and co-operation, and the desirability of Mercury's winged feet and cap of darkness for the weapon itself. It is on the former that opinions in Europe vary most. Some armies ensure co-operation by making the machine-gun section an integral part of the infantry regimental organization, but in this case the officer commanding it must be taught and allowed to shake himself free from his comrades and immediate superiors when necessary. Others ensure co-operation of the machine-guns as an arm by using them, absolutely free of infantry control, on batteries; but this brings them face to face with the risks of showing, not one or two low-lying gun-barrels, but a number of carriages, limbers and gun teams, within range of the enemy's artillery.

Fire Effect.

Ranging.

French experiments are said to show that the fire-power of a machine-gun is equal to that of 150-200 rifles at exactly known range, and to 60-80 rifles at ranges judged by the French "instantaneous range-finder." The German drill-book gives it as equal approximately to that of 80 rifles on an average. The distinction of known and unknown ranges is due to the fact that the "cone of dispersion" of a large number of bullets in collective infantry fire is deeper than that of machine-gun fire. The latter therefore groups its bullets much more closely about the target if the latter is in the centre of the cone--viz. at known ranges--but if the distance be misjudged not only the close central group of 50% of the shots, but even the outlying rounds may fall well away from the target. At 1500 yards range the "50 per cent. zone" with the Maxim gun is only 34 yards deep as compared with the 60 yards of a half-company of rifles.[9] The accuracy of the gun is more marked when the breadth of the cone of dispersion is taken into account. The "75 per cent." zone is in the case of the machine-gun about as broad at 2000 yards as that of collective rifle fire at 500. At the School of Musketry, South Africa, a trial between 42 picked marksmen and a Maxim at an unknown range at service targets resulted in 408 rounds from the rifles inflicting a loss of 54% on the enemy's firing line represented by the targets, and 228 rounds from the Maxim inflicting one of 64%. Another factor is rapidity of fire. It is doubtful if infantry can keep up a rate of 12 rounds a minute for more than two or three minutes at a time without exhaustion and consequent wild shooting. The machine-gun, with all its limitations in this respect, can probably, taking a period of twenty or thirty minutes, deliver a greater volume of fire than fifty rifles, and assuming that, by one device or another (ranging by observing the strike of the bullets, the use of a telemeter, or the employment of "combined sights") the 75% cone of bullets has been brought on to the target, that fire will be more effective. The serious limiting condition is the need of accurate ranging. If this is unsatisfactory the whole (and not, as with infantry, a part) of the fire effect may be lost, and if the safe expedient of "combined sights"[10] be too freely resorted to, the consumption of ammunition may be out of all proportion.

Vulnerability.

The vulnerability of machine-guns is quite as important as is their accuracy. At a minimum, that is when painted a "service" colour, manoeuvred with skill, and mounted on a low tripod--in several armies even the shield has been rejected as tending to make guns more conspicuous--the vulnerability of one gun should be that of one skirmisher lying down. At a maximum, vulnerability is that of a small battery of guns and wagons limbered up.

Mobility.

Mobility comes next. The older patterns of hand-operated guns weighed about 90 lb. at least, without carriage, the earlier patterns of Maxims (such as that described in detail above) about 60 lb. But the most modern Maxims weigh no more than 35 lb. Now, such weapons with tripods can be easily carried to and fro by one or two men over ground that is impracticable for wheeled carriages. Nevertheless, wheeled carriages are often used for the ordinary transport of the gun and its equipment, especially with the heavier models. The simplest machine-gun has a number of accessories--tools, spare parts, &c.--that must be conveyed with it, and at the least a pack-animal is indispensable.

Reducing these conditions to a phrase--the fire effect that can be reasonably expected of machine-guns is that of fifty or sixty rifles, the space it takes up in the line can be made to equal that occupied by two men, and it possesses by turns the speed of a mounted man and the freedom of movement of an infantryman.

Machine-Guns as a Reserve of Fire.

Machine-Guns with Cavalry.

The use of the machine-gun (apart from savage warfare) that first commended itself in Europe was its use as a _mobile reserve of fire_. Now, the greatest difficulty attending the employment of a reserve of any sort is the selection of the right moment for its intervention in the struggle, and experience of manoeuvres of all arms in Germany, where "machine-gun detachments" began to be formed in 1902, appears to have been that the machine-guns always came into action too late. On the other hand, the conditions of the cavalry _versus_ cavalry combat were more favourable. Here there was every inducement to augment fire-power without dismounting whole regiments for the purpose. Moreover, vulnerability was not a fatal defect as against a battery or two of the enemy's horse artillery, whose main task is to fire with effect into the closed squadrons of mounted men on the verge of their charge, and above all to avoid a meaningless duel of projectiles. The use of wheeled carriages was therefore quite admissible (although in fact the equipment was detachable from the carriage) and, given the rapidity and sudden changes of cavalry fighting, both desirable and necessary. Thus, thanks to the machine-gun, the eternal problem of increasing the fire-power of mounted troops is at last partially solved, and the solution has appealed strongly both to armies exceptionally strong in cavalry, as for example the German, and to those exceptionally weak in that arm--Denmark, for instance, having two or three light machine-guns _per squadron_. The object of the weaker cavalry may be to cause the onset of the stronger to dwindle away into a dismounted skirmish, and this is most effectually brought about by a fire concentrated enough and heavy enough to discourage mounted manoeuvres; on the other hand, the stronger party desires to avoid dismounting a single squadron that can be kept mounted; and this too may be effected by the machine-guns. What the result of such a policy on both sides may be, it would be hard to prophesy, but it is clear at any rate that, whether on the offensive or on the defensive, skilfully handled machine-guns may enable a cavalry commander to achieve the difficult and longed-for result--to _give the law_ to his opponent. The principal difference between the tactics of the stronger and those of the weaker cavalry in this matter is, that it is generally advantageous for the former to act by batteries and for the latter to disperse his machine guns irregularly in pairs.

Machine-Guns in Combined Tactics.

It is not merely in cavalry tactics that the question of "section or battery" arises. It deeply affects the machine-gun tactics in the battle of all arms, and it is therefore decided in each service by the use to which the guns are intended to be put. One powerful current of opinion is in favour of employing them as a mobile reserve of fire. This opinion was responsible for the creation of the German machine-gun batteries or "detachments"; and in the drill regulations issued in 1902 for their guidance it was stated that the proper use of machine-guns required a comprehensive and accurate knowledge of the general situation, and that therefore only the superior leaders could employ them to advantage. Manoeuvre experience, as mentioned above, has caused considerable modification in this matter, and while the large machine-gun "detachments" are now definitely told off to the cavalry, new and smaller units have been formed, with the title "companies" to indicate their attachment to the infantry arm. A recent official pronouncement as to the role of the "companies" (Amendments to _Exerzierreglement für die Infanterie_, 1909) is to the effect that the companies are an integral part of the infantry, that their mission is to augment directly the fire of the infantry, and that their employment is in the hands of the infantry regimental commander, who keeps the guns at his own disposition or distributes them to the battalions as he sees fit. It must be remembered that the regiment is a large unit, 3000 strong, and the idea of a "mobile reserve of fire" is tacitly maintained, although it has been found necessary to depart from the extreme measure of massing the guns and holding them at the disposal of a general officer. The Japanese regulations state that in principle the machine-gun battery fights as a unit; that although it may be advantageously employed with the advanced guard to assure the possession of supporting points, its true function is to intervene with full effect in the decisive attack, its use in the delaying action being "a serious error." In France, on the other hand, the system of independent sections is most rigidly maintained; when in barracks, the three sections belonging to an infantry regiment are combined for drill, but in the field they seem to be used exclusively as sections. They are not, however, restricted to the positions of their own battalions; taught probably by the experiences of the British in South Africa, they co-operate with instead of following the infantry. In Great Britain, _Field Service Regulations_, part i., 1909, lay down that "machine-guns are best used in pairs[11] in support of the particular body of troops to which they belong" (i.e. battalions). "The guns of two or more units may, if required,[12] be placed under a specially selected officer and employed as a special reserve of fire in the hands of a brigade commander" (corresponding to German regimental commander), but "if an overwhelming fire on a particular point is required, it can be obtained by concentrating the fire of dispersed pairs of guns." More explicitly still, "the movements and fire action of these weapons should be _regulated so as to enable them to open fire immediately a favourable opportunity arises._"

Contrasting the German system with the French and English, we may observe that it is German tactics _as a whole_ that impose a method of using machine-guns which the Germans themselves recognize as being in many respects disadvantageous. A German force in action possesses little depth, i.e. reserves, except on the flanks where the enveloping attack is intended to be made. Consequently, a German commander needs a reserve of fire in a mechanical, concentrated form more than a British or a French commander, and, further, as regards the decisive attack on the flanks, it is intended not merely to be sudden but even more to be powerful and overwhelming. These considerations tend to impose both the massing and the holding in reserve of machine-guns. The French and British doctrine (see TACTICS) is fundamentally different. Here, whether the guns be massed or not, there is rarely any question of using the machine-guns as a special reserve. In the decisive attack, and especially at the culmination of the decisive attack, when concealment has ceased and power is everything, the machine-guns can render the greatest services when grouped and boldly handled. Above all, they must reach the captured crest in a few minutes, so as to crush the inevitable offensive return of the enemy's reserves. The decisive attack, moreover, is not a prearranged affair, as in Germany, but the culmination, "at a selected point, of gradually increasing pressure relentlessly applied to the enemy at all points" (_F. S. Regulations_). The holding attack, as this "pressure" is called, is not a mere feint. It is launched and developed as a decisive attack, though not completed as such, as it lacks the necessary reserve strength. Here, then, the machine-gun is best employed in enabling relatively small forces to advance--not to assault--without undue loss, that is, in economizing rifles along the non-decisive front.[13]

Withal, there are certain principles, or rather details of principle, that find general acceptance. One of these is the employment of machine-guns with the advanced guard. In this case the value of the weapon lies in its enabling the advanced guard both to seize favourable ground and points of support without undue effort and to hold the positions gained against the enemy's counter-attack. This applies, further, to the preliminary stages of an action.[14] Another point is that as a rule the most favourable range for the machine-gun is "effective infantry," i.e. 600-1400 yards (which is, _mutatis mutandis_, the principle of Reffye's mitrailleuse). Its employment at close infantry range depends entirely on conditions of ground and circumstances--even supposing that the handiest and most inconspicuous type of weapon is employed. Thirdly--and this has a considerable bearing on the other points--the machine-gun both concentrates many rifles on a narrow front, and concentrates the bullets of many rifles on a narrow front. The first clause implies that it can be used where there is no room (physically or tactically) for the fifty or eighty riflemen it represents (as, for instance, in some slight patch of cover whence the gun can give effective cross-fire in support of the infantry attack, or in front of an advanced post, or can watch an exposed flank), and, further, that it can be swung round laterally on to a fresh target far more easily than a line of excited and extended infantry can be made to change front. The second means that the exit of a defile, an exposed turn in a lane or on a bridge, can be beaten by closely grouped fire at greater distances and with greater accuracy than is attainable with riflemen.

Further, the waste of ammunition and the strain on the weapon caused by unnecessarily prolonged firing at the rate for which its mechanism is set--varying between 350 and 700 rounds a minute--have caused it to be laid down as an axiom in all armies that machine-guns shall deliver their fire by "bursts" and only on favourable targets.

Lastly, the reports, both of observers and combatants, are unanimous as to the immense moral effect produced on the combatants by the unmistakable drumming sound of the machine-guns, an effect comparable even at certain stages of the fight to the boom of the artillery itself.

_Equipments in Use._--Practically all nations have abandoned the
simple wheeled carriage for machine-guns, or rather have adopted the
tripod or table mounting, reserving the wheeled vehicle for the mere
transport of the equipment. Since the Russo-Japanese War the tendency
has been to sacrifice the slight protection afforded by the shield in
order to reduce visibility. The Japanese, who had unprotected field
guns and protected machine-guns in the war, found it advisable to
reverse this procedure, for reasons that can easily be guessed in the
cases of both weapons.

_Great Britain._--The service machine-gun is the Maxim .303 in.,
adjusted to a rate of 450 rounds per minute and sighted (except in a
few weapons) to 2900 yards. The original patterns weighed 60 lb., and
were mounted on wheeled carriages. In the latest pattern, however, the
weight of the gun has been reduced to 36 lb. The old Mark I. cavalry
Maxim carriage, complete with gun, ammunition, &c., weighed 13 cwt.
behind the traces, and the gun was 5 ft. above the ground. It had no
limber. The Mark III. cavalry carriage is much lower (3´ 6´´ from the
ground to the gun), and the gun carriage and limber together only
weigh 13 cwt. Of infantry carriages there were various marks, one of
which is shown in fig. 6. Now, however, all mountings for infantry are
of the tripod type, transported on wheels or on pack animals, but
entirely detachable from the travelling mounting, and in action
practically never used except on the tripod. The Mark IV. tripod
mounting, of which a sketch is given in fig. 21, weighs 48 lb. The
total weight of the fighting equipment is thus 84 lb. only--an
important consideration now that in action the gun is man-carried. The
gun can be adjusted to fire at heights varying from 2´ 6´´ to 1´ 2½´´
only from the ground; in its lowest position, then, it is a little
lower than the head of a man firing lying. All the later infantry
machine-gun equipments are for pack transport and have no shields.

The organization of the machine-gun arm is regimental. Each cavalry
regiment and each infantry battalion has a section of 2 guns under an
officer.

_France._--The guns in use are the Puteaux and the Hotchkiss. The unit
is the regimental 2-gun section. Four-horsed carriages with limbers
are used with cavalry, tripods with the infantry sections. No shields.
Weight of the Hotchkiss in use, 50 lb.; of the tripod, 70 lb. The
Puteaux was lightened and improved in 1909.

_Germany._--As already mentioned the German machine-gun units are
classed as cavalry "detachments" and infantry "companies." The
"detachment" or battery consists of 6 guns and 4 wagons, the vehicles
being of a light artillery pattern and drawn by four horses. The gun
(Maxim) weighs 61 lb., and its fighting carriage 110 lb. The
"companies" have also 6 guns and 4 wagons, but the equipment is
lighter (two-horse), and is not constructed on artillery principles,
nor are the guns fired from their carriages as are those of the
"detachments." The weight of the gun is 38 lb., and that of the
fighting carriage 75 (some accounts give 53 for the latter), the
difference between these weights and those of the mounted equipments,
affording a good illustration of the difference in the tactical
requirements of the cavalry and of the infantry types of gun. The
fighting carriage is a sort of sledge, which is provided with four
legs for fire in the highest position, but can of course be placed on
the ground; the height of the gun, therefore, can be varied from 3´
6´´ to 1´ 6´´. The sledges can be dragged across country or carried by
men stretcher fashion, and sometimes several sledges are coupled and
drawn by a horse.

_Japan._--The Japanese Hotchkiss, as modified since the war with
Russia, is said to weigh 70 lb., and its tripod mounting 40. Each
regiment of infantry has a six-gun battery and each cavalry brigade
one of eight guns. Pack transport is used.

_Russia._--Since the war eight-gun companies have been formed in the
infantry regiments, and each cavalry regiment has been provided with
two guns. The var organization is, however, unknown. Both wheel and
pack transport are employed for travelling, but the guns are fought
from tripods. Early and somewhat heavy patterns of Maxim (with shield)
are chiefly used, but a great number of very light guns of the Madsen
type have been issued.

The _Austrian_ gun is the Schwarzlose, of which some details are given
above. Pack transport is used, one mule taking the whole equipment
with 1000 rounds. Weight of the gun 37.9 lb., of the tripod 41 lb. The
height of the tripod can be varied from 9¾ in. to 2 ft. above the
ground. It is proposed that each cavalry regiment should have four
guns, and each infantry regiment two. Switzerland adopted the Maxim in
1902. It is used principally as a substitute for horse artillery.
_Denmark_ and other small states have adopted the Madsen or Rexer
light-type guns in relatively large numbers, especially for cavalry.
In the _United States_ the British organization was after many trials
adopted, and each infantry and cavalry regiment has a two-gun section
of Maxims, with tripod mounting and pack transport.

See P. Azan, _Les premières mitrailleuses_ ("Revue d'Histoire de
l'Armée," July 1907); _Le Canon à balles, 1870-1871_ ("Revue d'Hist.
de l'Armée", 1909); Lieut-Colonel E. Rogers in "Journal R. United
Service Institution" of 1905; Capt. R. V. K. Applin, _Machine-gun
Tactics_ (London, 1910) and paper in "J. R. United Service Inst."
(1910); War Office Handbook to the Maxim gun (1907); Capt. Cesbron
Lavau, _Mitrailleuses de cavalerie_; Lieut. Buttin, _L'emploi des
mitrailleuses d'infanterie_; Major J. Goots, _Les Mitrailleuses_
(Brussels, 1908); and Merkatz, _Unterrichtsbuch für die
Masch.-Gewehrabteilungen_ (Berlin, 1906); Korzen & Kühn,
_Waffenlehre_, &c. (C. F. A.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The French term _mitrailleuse_, made famous by the War of 1870,
reappears in other Latin tongues (e.g. Spanish _ametralladora_). It
signifies a weapon which delivers a shower of small projectiles
(_mitraille_--grape or case shot), and has no special reference to
its mechanical (hand or automatic) action.

[2] Meudon Chateau had long been used for military experiments. The
peasantry credited it with mysterious and terrible secrets, asserting
even that it contained a tannery of human skins, this tradition
perhaps relating to the war balloon constructed there before the
battle of Fleurus (1794). Reffye had also many non-military tasks,
such as the reproduction of a famous set of bas-reliefs, construction
of aeroplanes, and the reconstruction of triremes and balistas.

[3] A machine-gun of the artillery or volley type, called the "Requa
battery," which had its barrels disposed fan-wise, was also used in
the Civil War.

[4] The U.S. pattern Gatling hardly differed except in details from
the model, above described, of twenty years earlier. The drum had
been set horizontally instead of vertically and improved in details,
and a "gravity feed," a tall vertical charger, was also used. The
barrels were surrounded with a light casing. Tests made of the
improved Gatling showed that the use of only one barrel at a time
prevented overheating. On one trial 63,000 rounds were fired without
a jam, and without stopping to clean the barrels. Smokeless powder
and the modern cartridge case were of course used.

[5] The following particulars may be given of the 2-barrelled Gardner
and 3-barrelled Nordenfeldt (land service) converted to take the .303
cartridge: Weight, 92 and 110 lb. respectively; parapet mounting in
each case 168 lb.; rate of fire of Gardner about 250 rounds per
minute, of the Nordenfeldt about 350. A few of these guns are still
used in fortresses and coast defences.

[6] Modern improvements in mechanical details are only slight, as may
be found by reference to the official handbooks of the gun, editions
of 1903 and 1907.

[7] At San-de-pu 1905 the Japanese machine-guns (Hotchkiss) sustained
damage averaging, 1 extractor broken per gun, 1 jam in every 300
rounds. It should be mentioned, however, that the machine-gun
companies were only formed shortly before the battle.

[8] In field operations only. For siege warfare see FORTIFICATION AND
SIEGECRAFT.

[9] For practical purposes in the field, the "effective" beaten zone,
containing 75% of the bullets, is the basis of fire direction both
for the machine-gun and the rifle. The depths of these "effective"
zones are on an average:--

+--------------+----------+------------+------------+-----------+
| At | 500 yds. | 1,000 yds. | 1,500 yds. | 2,000 yds.|
+--------------+----------+------------+------------+-----------+
| S.L.E. Rifle | 220 yds. | 120 yds. | 100 yds. | -- |
+--------------+----------+------------+------------+-----------+
| Maxim Gun | 150 yds. | 70 yds. | 60 yds. | 50 yds. |
+--------------+----------+------------+------------+-----------+

[10] "Combined sights" implies firing with the sights set for two
different ranges, the usual difference being 50 yds. With grouped
machine guns, "progressive fire" with elevations increasing by 25
yds. is used. This artificially disperses the fire, and therefore
lessens the chance of losing the target through ranging errors. One
ingenious inventor has produced a two-barrelled automatic, in which
the barrels are permanently set to give combined elevations. The
British memorandum of August 1909 seems to regard the facility of
employing combined sights as the principal advantage of the battery
over the section.

[11] The use of single guns facilitates concealment, but this is
outweighed by the objection that when a jam or other breakdown occurs
the fire ceases altogether. The use of guns in pairs not only
obviates this, but admits of each gun in turn ceasing fire to
economize ammunition, to cool down, &c. This is the old artillery
principle--"one gun is no gun."

[12] In the instructions issued in August 1909 one of the principal
advantages of grouped sections is stated to be the neutralization of
ranging errors at ranges over 1000 yards. At a less range, it is laid
down, grouped guns form too visible a target, unless the ground is
very favourable.

[13] The British instructions of August 1909 direct the grouping of
guns in the _decisive_ attack (if circumstances and ground favour
this course) and their use by sections "if the brigade is deployed on
a wide front," i.e. on the _non-decisive_ front; further, that it is
often advisable to disperse the sections of the leading battalions
and to group those of units in reserve. In any case, while the 2, 4
or 8 guns must be ready to act independently as a special "arm,"
their normal work is to give the closest support to the neighbouring
infantry (battalion in the holding, brigade in the decisive, attack).

[14] In Germany, however, the tendency is not to make holding attacks
but to keep the troops out of harm's way (i.e. too far away for the
enemy to counter-attack) until they can strike effectively.

MACÍAS [_O NAMORODO_] (_fl._ 1360-1390), Galician _trovador_, held some position in the household of Enrique de Villena. He is represented by five poems in the _Cancianero de Baena_, and is the reputed author of sixteen others. Macías lives by virtue of the romantic legends which have accumulated round his name. The most popular version of his story is related by Hernán Nuñez. According to this tradition, Macías was enamoured of a great lady, was imprisoned at Arjonilla, and was murdered by the jealous husband while singing the lady's praises. There may be some basis of fact for this narrative, which became a favourite subject with contemporary Spanish poets and later writers. Macías is mentioned in Rocaberti's _Gloria de amor_ as the Castillan equivalent of Cabestanh; he afforded a theme to Lope de Vega in _Porfiar hasta morir_; in the 19th century, at the outset of the romantic movement in Spain, he inspired Larra (q.v.) in the play _Macías_ and in the historical novel entitled _El doncel de Don Enrique el doliente_.

See H. A. Rennert, _Macías, o namorado; a Galician trobador_
(Philadelphia, 1900); Théodore J. de Puymaigre, _Les vieux auteurs
castillans_ (1889-1890), i. 54-74; _Cancioneiro Gallego-Castelhano_
(New York and London, 1902), ed. H. R. Lang; Christian F. Bellermann,
_Die alten Liederbücher der Portugiesen_ (Berlin, 1840).

MACINTOSH, CHARLES (1766-1843), Scottish chemist and inventor of waterproof fabrics, was born on the 29th of December 1766 at Glasgow, where he was first employed as a clerk. He devoted all his spare time to science, particularly chemistry, and before he was twenty resigned his clerkship to take up the manufacture of chemicals. In this he was highly successful, inventing various new processes. His experiments with one of the by-products of tar, naphtha, led to his invention of waterproof fabrics, the essence of his patent being the cementing of two thicknesses of india-rubber together, the india-rubber being made soluble by the action of the naphtha. For his various chemical discoveries he was, in 1823, elected F.R.S. He died on the 25th of July 1843.

See George Macintosh, _Memoir of C. Macintosh_ (1847).

MACKAY, CHARLES (1814-1889), Scottish writer, was born at Perth, on the 27th of March 1814, and educated at the Caledonian Asylum, London, and in Brussels. In 1830, being then private secretary to a Belgian ironmaster, he began writing verses and articles for local newspapers. Returning to London, he devoted himself to literary and journalistic work, and was attached to the _Morning Chronicle_ (1835-1844). He published _Memoirs of Extraordinary Public Delusions_ (1841), and gradually made himself known as an industrious and prolific journalist. In 1844 he was made editor of the Glasgow _Argus_. His literary reputation was made by the publication in 1846 of a volume of verses. _Voices from the Crowd_, some of which were set to music by Henry Russell and became very popular. In 1848 Mackay returned to London and worked for the _Illustrated London News_, of which he became editor in 1852. In it he published a number of songs, set to music by Sir Henry Bishop and Henry Russell, and in 1855 they were collected in a volume; they included the popular "Cheer, Boys! Cheer!" After his severance from the _Illustrated London News_, in 1859, Mackay started two unsuccessful periodicals, and acted as special correspondent for _The Times_ in America during the Civil War. He edited _A Thousand and One Gems of English Poetry_ (1867). Mackay died in London on the 24th of December 1889. Marie Corelli (q.v.) was his adopted daughter. His son, Eric Mackay (1851-1899), was known as a writer of verse, particularly by his _Love Letters of a Violinist_ (1886).

MACKAY, HUGH (c. 1640-1692), Scottish general, was the son of Hugh Mackay of Scourie, Sutherlandshire, and was born there about 1640. He entered Douglas's (Dumbarton's) regiment of the English army (now the Royal Scots) in 1660, accompanied it to France when it was lent by Charles II. to Louis XIV., and though succeeding, through the death of his two elder brothers, to his father's estates, continued to serve abroad. In 1669 he was in the Venetian service at Candia, and in 1672 he was back with his old regiment, Dumbarton's, in the French army, taking part under Turenne in the invasion of Holland. In 1673 he married Clara de Bie of Bommel in Gelderland. Through her influence he became, as Burnet says, "the most pious man that I ever knew in a military way," and, convinced that he was fighting in an unjust cause, resigned his commission to take a captaincy in a Scottish regiment in the Dutch service. He had risen to the rank of major-general in 1685, when the Scots brigade was called to England to assist in the suppression of the Monmouth rebellion. Returning to Holland, Mackay was one of those officers who elected to stay with their men when James II., having again demanded the services of the Scots brigade, and having been met with a refusal, was permitted to invite the officers individually into his service. As major-general commanding the brigade, and also as a privy councillor of Scotland, Mackay was an important and influential person, and James chose to attribute the decision of most of the officers to Mackay's instigation. Soon after this event the Prince of Orange started on his expedition to England, Mackay's division leading the invading corps, and in January 1688-89 Mackay was appointed major-general commanding in chief in Scotland. In this capacity he was called upon to deal with the formidable insurrection headed by Graham of Claverhouse, Viscount Dundee. In the battle of Killiecrankie Mackay was severely defeated, but Dundee was killed, and the English commander, displaying unexpected energy, subdued the Highlands in one summer. In 1690 he founded Fort William at Inverlochy, in 1691 he distinguished himself in the brilliant victory of Aughrim, and in 1692, with the rank of lieutenant-general, he commanded the British division of the allied army in Flanders. At the great battle of Steinkirk Mackay's division bore the brunt of the day unsupported and the general himself was killed.

Mackay was the inventor of the ring bayonet which soon came into general use, the idea of this being suggested to him by the failure of the plug-bayonet to stop the rush of the Highlanders at Killiecrankie. Many of his despatches and papers were published by the Bannatyne Club in 1883.

See _Life_ by John Mackay of Rockville (1836); and J. W. Fortescue,
_History of the British Army_, vol. i.

MACKAY, JOHN WILLIAM (1831-1902), American capitalist, was born in Dublin, Ireland, on the 28th of November 1831. His parents brought him in 1840 to New York City, where he worked in a ship-yard. In 1851 he went to California and worked in placer gold-mines in Sierra county. In 1852 he went to Virginia City, Nevada, and there, after losing all he had made in California, he formed with James G. Fair, James C. Flood and William S. O'Brien the firm which in 1873 discovered the great Bonanza vein, more than 1200 ft. deep, in the Comstock lode (yielding in March of that year as much as $632 per ton, and in 1877 nearly $19,000,000 altogether); and this firm established the Bank of Nevada in San Francisco. In 1884, with James Gordon Bennett, Mackay formed the Commercial Cable Company--largely to fight Jay Gould and the Western Union Telegraph Company--laid two transatlantic cables, and forced the toll-rate for transatlantic messages down to twenty-five cents a word. In connexion with the Commercial Cable Company he formed the Postal Telegraph Company. Mackay died on the 20th of July 1902 in London. He gave generously, especially to the charities of the Roman Catholic Church, and endowed the Roman Catholic orphan asylum in Virginia City, Nevada. In June 1908 a school of mines was presented to the University of Nevada, as a memorial to him, by his widow and his son, Clarence H. Mackay.

MACKAY, a seaport of Carlisle county, Queensland, Australia, on the Pioneer river, 625 m. direct N.N.W. Pop. (1901), 4091. The harbour is not good. Sugar, tobacco and coffee thrive in the district. There are several important sugar mills, one of which, the largest in Queensland, is capable of an annual output of 8000 tons. Rum is distilled, and there are a brewery and a factory for tinning butter for export. Workable coal is found in the district. This is the port of the Mt Orange and Mt Gotthart copper mines, and the Mt Britten and Eungella gold-fields. It is a calling-station for the Queensland royal mail steamers. The town is named after Captain John Mackay, who discovered the harbour in 1860.

McKEESPORT, a city of Allegheny county, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., at the confluence of the Monongahela and Youghiogheny rivers (both of which are navigable), 14 m. S.E. of Pittsburg. Pop. (1890), 20,741; (1900), 34,227, of whom 9349 were foreign-born and 748 were negroes; (1910 census) 42,694. It is served by the Baltimore & Ohio, the Pittsburg & Lake Erie and the Pennsylvania railways. The city has a Carnegie library, a general hospital, and two business schools. Bituminous coal and natural gas abound in the vicinity, and iron, steel, and tin and terne plate are extensively manufactured in the city, the tin-plate plant being one of the most important in the United States. The total value of the city's factory products was $36,058,447 in 1900 and $23,054,412 in 1905. The municipality owns and operates its water-works. The first white settler was David McKee, who established a ferry here in 1769. In 1795 his son John laid out the town, which was named in his honour, but its growth was very slow until after the discovery of coal in 1830. McKeesport was incorporated as a borough in 1842 and chartered as a city in 1890.

McKEES ROCKS, a borough of Allegheny county, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., on the Ohio river, about 3 m. N.W. of Pittsburg. Pop. (1890) 1687; (1900) 6352 (1264 foreign-born); (1910) 14,702. McKees Rocks is served by the Pittsburg & Lake Erie and the Pittsburg, Chartiers & Youghiogheny railways, the latter a short line extending (13 m.) to Beechmont. Bituminous coal and natural gas are found in the vicinity, and the borough ships coal and lumber, and has various important manufactures. There is an ancient Indian mound here. The first settlement was made in 1830, and the borough incorporated in 1892.

MACKENNAL, ALEXANDER (1835-1904), English Nonconformist divine, was born at Truro in Cornwall, on the 14th of January 1835, the son of Patrick Mackennal, a Scot, who had settled in Cornwall. In 1848 the family removed to London, and at sixteen he went to Glasgow University. In 1854 he entered Hackney College to prepare for the Congregational ministry, and in 1857 he graduated B.A. at London University. After holding pastorates at Burton-on-Trent (1856-1861), Surbiton (1862-1870), Leicester (1870-1876), he finally accepted the pastorate of the Congregational Church at Bowdon, Cheshire, in 1877, in which he remained till his death. In 1886 he was chairman of the Congregational Union, which he represented in 1889 at the triannual national council of the American Congregational churches. The first international council of Congregationalists held in London in 1891 was partly cause, partly consequence, of his visit, and Mackennal acted as secretary. In 1892 he became definitely associated in the public mind with a movement for free church federation which grew out of a series of meetings held to discuss the question of home reunion. When the Lambeth articles put forward as a basis of union were discussed, it was evident that all the free churches were agreed in accepting the three articles dealing with the Bible, the Creed and the Sacraments as a basis of discussion, and were also agreed in rejecting the fourth article, which put the historic episcopate on the same level as the other three. Omitting the Anglicans, the representatives of the remaining churches resolved to develop Christian fellowship by united action and worship wherever possible. Out of this grew the Free Church Federation, which secures a measure of co-operation between the Protestant Evangelical churches throughout England. Mackennal's public action brought him into association with many well-known political and religious leaders. He was a lifelong advocate of international peace, and made a remarkable declaration as to the Christian standard of national action when the Free Church Federation met at Leeds during the South African War in 1900.