Recollections of a Military Life

by Sir John Adye

It was in 1854 that Lord Armstrong first took up the subject, of which he has ever since been acknowledged as one of the chief authorities. He has also rendered good service in the establishment of a manufacturing arsenal at Elswick, which, in the event of a great war, would become of national advantage. The first rifled breech-loading guns of his pattern were adopted in 1859, and gave results in range and accuracy far beyond anything that had hitherto been achieved. They were followed by the introduction of others of a larger calibre; and so enthusiastic were the navy and artillery, that many of our vessels of war and fortresses were speedily supplied with them. Between 1859 and 1862, two millions and a half sterling were expended on new armaments.

Notwithstanding their great success and superiority, however, they developed considerable defects in regard to breech mechanism; and numerous accidents occurred both by sea and land, due in a measure to want of skill in their handling. It became evident from experience in the war in China in 1860, and in Japan in 1862-3, that they were somewhat delicate weapons.[102]

In 1863 the Armstrong and Whitworth competition took place, in which both firms were represented on the committee; and after lengthened trials they reported[103] in 1865 that the breech-loading system was inferior for purposes of war to that of muzzle-loading, and was more expensive. Other experiments followed, leading to a similar conclusion, and as a consequence the latter was adopted, and continued in force for many years; the guns rising rapidly in size and in weight from five up to one hundred tons. In 1867 a committee of thirteen artillery officers, under the late Field-Marshal Sir Richard Dacres, inquired into the subject as regards field guns, and reported unanimously in favour of muzzle-loaders. In 1868 the Admiralty were asked whether they wished the subject re-opened as regards naval guns, but they declined.

Having served in India from 1857 to 1866, I had, of course, no practical knowledge of the earlier stages of this difficult and much-debated subject; but on becoming Director of Artillery in 1870, I found that the two services were in practical unanimity as to the advantages of the rifled muzzle-loading system—that it was simpler, better adapted for war, and cheaper than the other. In 1871 the Admiralty were again consulted on the question, but with the same result as before. In that year, a German 9-pounder breech-loading field gun was obtained for comparison with our own; and after a long series of trials the committee reported that the English gun was superior, not only in simplicity, but in range and power, and in rapidity of fire.[104] It was also known that during the great war of 1870 upwards of two hundred German guns had become unserviceable. All experience, therefore, appeared at the time to point in one direction; but a change gradually arose, the causes of which were partly scientific, partly mechanical.

Whilst the attention of experts was engaged in the effort to produce the best gun, it ultimately proved that the real solution rested not so much with the weapon as with the motive power which gives life and force to the projectile. The question of gunpowder had until about 1870 remained much in the same stagnant, neglected condition as that of ordnance. Long and careful researches were, however, carried out at that time, chiefly by Sir Andrew Noble and Sir Frederick Abel, which led to the introduction of a comparatively mild and slow-burning explosive, and finally determined the system of gun-construction. In the first place, owing to its gradual combustion, the excessive strain on the breech mechanism was much diminished; and further, as an improved system of closing had been adopted, the difficulties, and the accidents at critical moments, which had been so perplexing, were in a great measure at an end. That was one important result; but there was a second. As the explosion was no longer instantaneous, but comparatively gradual, it followed that larger charges could be employed, and in order to utilise them greater length of bore became necessary, as, within limits, the longer the gun the greater the initial velocity and consequent range and power.

These altered conditions were manifestly both in favour of breech-loading, not so much as a matter of principle, but of convenience. Sir Andrew Noble, in writing to me on the subject in 1875, said: 'As regards the effects to be produced from a gun, precisely the same results can be attained, whether it be made in the form of a muzzle or a breech-loader. There is no magic, as many seem to imagine, in one form or the other.... As regards convenience in using, there may be, and undoubtedly are, differences.' Between 1875 and 1880 experiments were somewhat slowly carried out, with a view to re-introducing breech-loading. Having been appointed Surveyor-General of the Ordnance in the latter year, I advised that the experiments should be pushed on vigorously, and on a larger scale. The adoption of steel, to the exclusion of wrought iron, in the construction of guns, was another important change about to take place; and, with a view to a full consideration of these great questions, Mr. Childers in 1881 re-established a permanent Ordnance Committee, which for some reason had been abolished in 1867. The main principles thus established, the naval and military armaments have since proceeded uninterruptedly. Many improvements, especially as regards quick firing, have recently been introduced; and we have every reason to believe that they are fully equal in all respects to those of any other nation.

That this subject has been a difficult and an anxious one is evident. Lord Armstrong, in his address to the Civil Engineers in 1882, said: 'All breech-loading mechanism is of a nature to require very accurate fittings, and require care both in use and for preservation.' Again, in a work published as late as 1893 by Commander Lloyd, R.N., and Mr. A. Hadcock, late R.A., of the Elswick establishment, they say 'that it has taken all the ingenuity, backed by all the mechanical resources of the present day, to obtain a satisfactory breech-loading arrangement.'[105] The whole question is extremely technical; but I have endeavoured to give an outline of its broad characteristics; and it is evident that the consideration of so vital a question requires a permanent committee of naval and artillery officers, and of scientific civil engineers; we may then feel confidence that the requirements of the two services will be adequately dealt with.

Even the placid and scientific temperament of an Ordnance Committee may, however, occasionally be subject to a severe strain. Many years ago, a proposal was submitted by some inventor that a small gun, strapped broadside across a horse's back, and fired from that position, would be useful, especially in mountain campaigns. The experiment was made in the Arsenal at Woolwich, the horse's head being tied to a post, with the muzzle of the gun pointed to an old earthen butt; the Committee standing on the other side of the horse to watch the result. The gun was loaded, and, in order to give time, a slow-burning fuse was used to fire it. The Committee, however, in tying the animal's head, had omitted to take the precaution of also making fast its tail. The first result was that, when the horse heard the fizzing of the fuse on its back, it became uneasy and walked round the post, so that the gun, instead of pointing at the butt, was thus directed straight at the heads of the Committee. Not a moment was to be lost; down went the chairman and members, lying flat and low on their stomachs. The gun went off; the shot passed over the town of Woolwich, and fell in the Dockyard; the horse being found lying on its back several yards away. The Committee were fortunately unhurt, and gradually recovered their equilibrium, but reported unanimously against any further trial.

Armaments and Reserves.—Amongst the many subjects which constantly occupy the attention of the War Department is the provision of adequate reserves of armaments, small arms, gunpowder, accoutrements, camp equipage, harness, clothing, and the numerous Engineer, medical, and commissariat stores which have to be maintained in readiness for war, not only in the United Kingdom, but at our stations in various parts of the world. The great majority of these reserves are required for both the fighting services; and until recently have been provided and cared for by the War Office, acting in co-operation with the Admiralty. The subject is not only complex, but very little is known by the public as to its administration and cost. Formerly, the provision of these costly armaments and stores rested with the Ordnance Department; and, as the successive Master Generals were men of the highest distinction and experience in war, the country had a guarantee that the national requirements would be duly considered and maintained. As the Duke of Wellington wrote in 1843, 'the Ordnance Department and the office of Master General is constituted for the service of the Navy as well as that of the Army.'