The Percussion Lock.—In 1807 a Scotch clergyman by the name of Alexander Forsyth, invented a new method of igniting the charge in fire-arms, which, after various changes and improvements, settled down to what is now known as the percussion cap. The percussion lock was a simultaneous invention, of course; though it did not differ materially, in point of construction, from the old flint-lock already in use. The main difference consisted in the substitution of a cylinder and tube for the priming pan and frizzen, and a hammer for the cock.
A strong current of prejudice set at once against the percussion lock, though nobody could tell why. All declared it would not do, but none attempted to give a reason for the faith that was in them. As a result the new invention was pretty effectually held in the background until 1834, when its opponents accepted a challenge for a public test of its merits against those of the flint-lock. The test extended to 6,000 rounds. In the course of these the percussion lock (afterwards more commonly known as the cap-lock), gave but six miss-fires, while the flint-lock scored nine hundred and twenty-two misses.
This astounding defeat at once sealed the fate of the flint-lock; still it was a long time before the prejudice existing against the other could be entirely removed. Even as far down as the date of our Mexican war, General Scott flatly objected to its use in his army, and had his men armed with the flint-lock, although there were then in our arsenals percussion-lock muskets enough to have armed all his forces more than twice over.
But facts are such stubborn things that even the strongest prejudice must give way to them sooner or later. So it proved in this instance; one by one the manufacturers of flint-lock fire-arms adopted the improvements resulting from the discoveries of the Scotch clergyman, until finally no more flint-locks were made, and the percussion lock was in undisputed possession of the field.
The Breech-Loader.—When the percussion-lock had been fully adopted by the public, and all the “latest improvements” had been added to it, people thought that the fire-arm had attained to such a degree of perfection as to preclude any further change in the future; but how mistaken! The fate of the percussion-lock is now as much sealed as was that of the flint-lock at the test-trial of 1834. It is going the way of all its predecessors, and its entire extinction is only a matter of time. The breech-loader, with charge and ignition combined in the same cartridge, is rapidly taking its place, and, until some new and wonderful discovery comes to the surface, must, undoubtedly, stand paramount as the gun of the future.
While springing into general favor at one leap, as it were, the breech-loader is no new and sudden appearance. In truth it is of great antiquity. In the Tower of London, the Woolwich Museum, and in the Museum of Paris, may be seen hundreds of breech-loaders that were made centuries ago. Of course they were not made to use the percussion cartridge peculiar to many such guns of modern make, nevertheless they were veritable breech-loaders, and the real suggestors, no doubt, of the modern arm of that character.
In the Museum of Artillery, at Woolwich, there is a breech-loading pierrier, or paterera, of the time of Edward IV. (1471). It consists of a directing barrel, terminating in a square bar or frame of iron, and a separate loading chamber, with handle, which was fastened in its place for firing by an iron wedge. There are also found in the museums many breech-loading pistols, that were evidently in use about cotemporaneous with this gun.
The records kept at St. Etienne, France, show that the French monarch, Henry II, shot with a breech-loading gun in 1540. And the English records show that the Marquis of Worcester took out a patent in that country for a breech action on the “cut-screw” principle in 1661. A portion of the specification reads as follows:
“An invencione to make certain guns or pistols which in the tenth part of one minute of an hour may be re-charged; the fourth part of one turne of the barrell, which remains still fixt, fastening it as foreceably and effectually as a dozen shrids of any screw, which, in the ordinary and usual way require as many turnes.”