reduced, as not only was the weight of these guns less, but their boré larger.

In other respects ships' batteries underwent but slight modification up to the battle of Trafalgar, as will be seen from the armament of the Santissima Trinidad, the largest vessel in the allied Franco-Spanish fleet. This ship, built at the Havannah, had 126 guns. The Victory, the English flag-ship, had on its three decks ninety 32, 24, and 12-pounders, ten long 12-pounders, bow and stern, and two 68-pounder carronades. The weight of a broadside was, in the Santissima Trinidad, 1190; in the Victory, 1180 lbs. A modern screw man-of-war of 140 guns, like the Marlborough or La Bretagne, hurls a broadside of 3500 lbs., or thrice the above weight, while every shot would penetrate the sides of the ships engaged at Trafalgar. This comparison is a striking proof of the progress marine artillery has made during the last fifty years.

In the reduction of the calibre of the guns the authorities had gone from one extreme to the other, and up to thirty years ago the long 18-pounder was considered the lucky mean. Hence it was universally employed for ships' batteries. It was, however, found by trial that this gun was too heavy for the upper deck, apart from the fact that owing to its length it occupied too much space. Its weight strained the beams, and hence 9-pounders were substituted on the upper deck. But this cannon was found to have too little weight and percussive force, and hence, as we have seen, the carronade was introduced. A 32-pounder carronade, with its carriage, weighs little more than a mounted 9-pounder. Hence the effect of the broadside, especially at short distances, was greatly augmented, for while the striking force of a 9-pounder ball at its greatest speed only gives 14,000 lbs., that of the 32-pounder carronade is 25,000 lbs., or nearly double. What the carronade lost by its reduced charge and length in accuracy of fire was made up again by the greater truth of the bore and the lessened windage. The art of boring cannon was formerly so imperfect, that it was found impossible to give a long gun the reduced windage of the carronade.

The great effect of carronades at short distances induced several governments to arm frigates and corvettes exclusively with that class of gun, an error from which the English suffered terribly in the American war of 1813-15. They were perfectly powerless against the heavilyarmed American frigates, which fired at them from distances which the carronades could not carry.

Since this war a new system of marine artillery has been introduced, chiefly consisting in the heavy armament of vessels, removing all carronades below 32-pounders, and introducing a greater regularity of calibre. The conviction was arrived at that the great variety of calibres produced considerable confusion in action, as mistakes took place in the powder charges and balls, and the rapidity of fire was thus greatly impeded; 32-pounders, divided into three classes, were therefore introduced, differing in length and weight according to the decks. Still, the enormous quantity of old material, which could not be thrown away, deferred this salutary change for several years, and many attempts were made to convert the 24-pounders into 32-pounders by increasing the bore, but this soon proved impracticable. The guns were not strong enough to stand an

increased charge, and so many accidents occurred that the system was discontinued. At one time, 42-pounder guns were introduced in the lower battery, but were soon abolished, as their increased weight was not compensated by improved accuracy and range.

The employment of steam in vessels of war introduced a further change in the system of marine artillery. As the vessels were all paddlewheeled at the outset, and the greater portion of the machinery above water, these vessels could not be employed against large ships unless they had a superior armament to any yet employed. In order, then, to derive all possible advantage from the rapidity of steam motion, it was found necessary to arm the new vessels with the heaviest guns they could carry, especially as the space occupied by the machinery did not allow them to employ a broadside in action. England, who was first in the field with steam ships-of-war, solved the problem, by constructing a 56-pounder 11 feet long, and weighing 98 cwt., which was so superior to the 32pounders of the gun vessels, that the ships armed with it were rendered perfectly secure. Although this cannon only fired solid shot, it was superior to the shell-guns which were being gradually introduced, both in range and force.

These shell-guns were the invention of a French artillery officer, Colonel Paixhans. As far back as 1810 the French had a species of howitzer cast at Seville, with which they fired thirteen shells into Cadiz at a distance of seven thousand paces. This gun appears to have given Colonel Paixhans the leading idea for the construction of his shell-guns, although it was first suggested by Napoleon I., who wrote to the minister of marine in 1807: "I desire that you will have a gun cast at Douai to fire 8-inch grenades. At the same time have 78-pounder solid balls prepared for these guns, and make trial of their range and effect; such projectiles, if fired by a battery of twenty such cannon, must produce a magnificent effect."

The original Paixhans gun weighed 73 cwt., and was 9 feet 10 inches in length; it fired a solid shot of 86 lbs. and a shell of 66 lbs. As these guns were found too heavy for ordinary steamers, they underwent some modifications, and at last a 68-pounder shell-gun of 65 cwt. and 9 feet long was adhered to. These guns were gradually introduced into the batteries of all ships of the line, and are divided into three classes: No. 1, 95 cwt., for the bow and stern-chasers of steamers: these are nearly all pivot-guns on the upper deck; No. 2, 65 cwt., now the usual battery gun of ships of the line and heavy frigates; No. 3, 52 cwt., for smaller frigates and corvettes. All the other guns are still the 32-pounders we have already described, so that there are only two calibres on board our fighting ships, which, as we have seen, is of great importance.

While England, France, Russia, and Holland follow this system with slight variations, America has employed another principle, and fallen into an error, from which it will suffer severely on the first collision with any other naval power. This principle consists in arming their ships with the smallest number of guns of the largest possible calibre. Thus, in 1845, a gun was cast at Liverpool for the United States frigate Princeton, weigh ing above 16,000 lbs. The solid shot fired from it was 12 inches in diameter, and weighed 213 lbs. ; the shell, 152 lbs. A similar gun had burst the previous year and killed several of the crew. Since then, the United

States government have carried this principle still further, and have offered an instance of a ship's armament, which, though it has produced considerable excitement, has not yet been imitated either by England or France. A screw-frigate, the Niagara, was built, the largest in the world. Its length is no less than 300 feet, with a breadth of 60 feet. This colossal frigate, which is larger than any 140-gun man-of-war, is armed with 12 guns of the above calibre. It is indubitable that these guns must have a greater range than any 68 or 32-pounder; but it is a question whether, in the oscillation of the vessel, the accuracy of such a gun is augmented. We may safely assume that such is not the case, for the accuracy of fire in action does not depend solely from the construction of the piece, but the skill of the captain of the gun and the choice of the right moment for firing. Further, although it is certain that if a 213 lb. solid shot strikes, it will make a much larger hole than a 68-pounder, and the same is the case with the shell, if the Niagara wished to fight our Marlborough, it would have only 6 guns to oppose to a broadside of 70. These 70, however, fire a simultaneous broadside of 3000 lbs., while that of the Niagara only amounts to 1278 lbs. The Marlborough can load her guns at least thrice during the time the Niagara fires once, and thus fires 210 balls against 6. Other things being equal, it is more probable that twenty of these will hit sooner than one out of six. But twenty 32-pounder solid shot, or only five 68-pounder shells, will produce more damage than one 213-pounder, and the Americans have made, in our opinion, a grand miscalculation. Both English and French are very careful not to be outpaced by other nations in their marine progress, and they would assuredly have imitated the Niagara if they had not arrived at a similar conclusion with ourselves.

Since the introduction of the screw, the paddle-wheel steamers are gradually disappearing from the Navy List, and no new 56-pounders are now cast. In their place we have the long 68-pounder gun, No. 1, which is used as a swivel-gun on board ships of the line and frigates. This gun surpasses the 56-pounder in nearly every respect, and can also be used to fire shell,

During the last ten years increased efforts have been made in all maritime countries to improve the guns. North America has been especially anxious to reduce the weight of the cannon by removing all superfluous metal, while maintaining the calibre. Enormous sums have been expended on this for years, but the result is not yet satisfactory, as far as large guns are concerned. Captain Dahlgren, a Swedish officer in the American service, has, however, produced a howitzer for arming boats, which is handier than any gun hitherto known. It is divided into three classes, two being 12-pounders, the other 24. The 12-pounder, No. 2, weighs, including the carriage, 450 lbs.; No. 1, 750 lbs.; and the 24pounder, 1000 lbs. To furnish an idea of the value of this gun, we need only state that a No. 2 has been fired seven times in thirty-five seconds. The desire to increase the rapidity of fire has led to many attempts being made, during the last ten years, to obtain breech-loading guns. Of such cannon two varieties have been repeatedly subjected to trial: one invented by Major Cavalli, in the Sardinian service, the other by the Swedish Baron Wahrendorff. Both guns are rifled with two grooves

with a half turn, fire cylindro-conical balls, and only differ in the mode of closing the chamber after the charge has been introduced. Both guns surpass the 32-pounders in range and penetration; but the trials made with them in England and Sweden proved that the mode of closing did not offer sufficient guarantee against accidents by bursting, and hence their introduction has been for the present postponed.

The idea of breech-loading guns is not at all new, for it was employed at the commencement of the sixteenth century. In an old Spanish work on artillery, written by Captain Diego Veano, a French translation of which appeared in 1628, two cannon are drawn and described, which were breech-loaders. One was a bronze gun (pierrier), which fired a stone weighing 120 lbs. In loading, the chamber was taken out, and after being filled with powder, and the ball placed in the barrel, it was screwed in again. The author states, however, that this mode of loading was very inconvenient and tedious, and that he had only seen one gun of this sort in the Lisbon arsenal. On the other hand, he speaks very highly of a second cannon of this nature, whose dimensions he merely describes as "longue et estroite," and says that it was chiefly employed on board ships, because it was so handy to load. According to the drawing, the separate chamber was enclosed in a portion of the barrel, like in the needle-gun, and hermetically closed by a horizontal iron wedge. He also remarks, that for more rapid firing, each cannon was supplied with thirty or forty of these chambers, which served to protect the powder from dampness. We can approximate to the time required by loading, for the author declares that it was done while the gun was being run out again, or, at the most, did not occupy more than two minutes, even with the clumsy appliances then used. That such guns were pretty generally employed on board vessels, is seen from the fact that the above-mentioned iron gun brought up from the wreck of the Mary Rose, has also a removable chamber. A small bronze 4-pounder, found on an island near Australia, and which belonged to a Dutch vessel lost there in 1727, is also made in the same fashion; and another gun of the same sort, bearing the date of 1650, was recently brought home from the Gambia by an English war-steamer.

During the Crimean war, the Lancaster gun was constructed in England, and great results were expected from it in the bombardment of Cronstadt. A cannon was desired to fire shell at such distances that the vessel armed with it should be out of the enemy's range, for the question of wooden walls against stone walls might result in favour of the latter. The English fancied they had solved the problem by casting an 85 cwt. gun, 11 feet long, and weighing 93 cwt., rifled after the principle of the rifle, and firing an oblong wrought-iron shell. Experiments were tried on land and water, which gave the enormous range of 7000 paces; but the other results were not so favourable, as the shells had an unhappy knack of bursting in the mouth of the gun, and had a most eccentric flight. In addition, the gun burst at the seventh round, by a shell sticking fast in it. The English government seemed inclined to give the gun up, but, being urged by the public press, armed several gun-boats with the new cannon, some proceeding to the Baltic, others to the Black Sea. At the bombardment of Sveaborg the Lancaster guns

did no special service; two were landed at Balaklava, and employed to sink the Russian ships of the line: one of them burst after a few days, and killed a large number of its servers, while the other was fired for a long time at the ships, but never hit one of them even by accident. These results caused the gun to be withdrawn.

We have thus come down to the two great inventions of the day-the Armstrong gun and the Napoleon howitzer. The former has been too often described for us to delay with it here, and is still in an experimental stage; but the French gun, having been tried and not found wanting, deserves a few lines of notice.

The canon à la Napoléon has been hitherto kept a great secret, and only a few general ideas of its construction have oozed out. It has several points in common with the Armstrong gun: the rifled bore, the cylindro-conical form of the projectiles, and the circumstance that the latter are shells, which are converted into solid shot by filling them with sand and sawdust. In other respects they vary, however. The Napoleon gun is made of common gun-metal, has six grooves, with one turn in every two metres, is loaded at the mouth, and the projectile is guided by six slightly projecting zinc wings, which fit into the grooves. These guns were made before the Crimean war, and some batteries were even taken into action. They, however, inspired the French commanders with but little confidence; did not fulfil the expectations, and the old system was adhered to. At that time these guns had only three grooves, and the projectile six wings, two fitting into each groove. But it was found that three grooves produced too much friction, and they were raised to the present number.

Incredible rumours have been spread of the range and accuracy of these guns: thus, we are told that a single horseman can be struck at nine thousand paces; still this requires confirmation. We can easily explain the great range and accuracy of the Armstrong gun, for its construction and the form of the ball are far superior to the French. By the breech loading the windage is entirely prevented, and the gases cannot escape between the projectile and the side of the gun. This cannot be the case, however, in the French gun, as it is loaded at the muzzle, and both the ball and its wings must have a certain amount of windage. Again, while the Armstrong projectile is placed in the chamber without any particular care, the French gunner must accurately fit the wings into the grooves, a defect which will be very perceptible in action and powder-smoke. However, by both inventions great progress has been made in artillery, and the possibility of grooving field-pieces has restored them their old superiority, of which the Enfield rifle once threatened to deprive them. One circumstance greatly in favour of the French cannon is, that the ordinary metal can be used for them; and it is said that guns of the old system can be rifled without any injury to their strength, as the powder-charge has been so greatly reduced. While formerly the charge was one-fourth the weight of the ball, it is reduced in the new guns to one-fifth. On the other hand, the Armstrong system can neither be applied to the old guns, nor can they be made of the ordinary gun metal. Hence its universal introduction will entail an enormous expense, and considerable time. The 12-pounder à la Napoléon weighs about 12 cwt., the old 24-pounder April-VOL. CXVIII. NO. CCCCLXXII.

2 K