GUNNERY--MUZZLE-LOADERS AND BREECH-LOADERS.
To the young sportsman, armed with the finest of implements, and
trusting much to them for his success, it is a matter of mortification
and surprise how well a bad gun will shoot in good hands; nevertheless,
no true sportsman ever lived but, if he were able by any self-denial to
scrape the means together, would purchase a valuable and necessarily
expensive fowling-piece. Not only is a well made and handsomely finished
gun safer and lighter than a cheap affair manufactured for the wholesale
trade; not only does it ordinarily carry closer and recoil less; but it
needs fewer repairs, lasts infinitely longer, and is always a matter of
pride and delight to its owner.
Many guns of inferior workmanship throw shot as strongly as those turned
out by the best makers--although this is not the fact in general--but
greater weight has to be given to insure tolerable safety, and the
locks, if not the barrels, are sure to give out in a few years; whereas
the high-priced article will be as perfect at the end of a dozen
years--which have accustomed its owner to its easy, rapid, and effective
management--as it was in the beginning, and will endure until failing
sight, wasting disease, or accumulating years, shall compel its
transfer into younger hands.
Unless a man has continual practice, or is an excellent shot, it is a
serious undertaking to change his gun and accustom himself to another,
which, although apparently identical in weight and shape, will
inevitably differ in some slight point that will be sufficient to
destroy, for a time, accuracy in aim and prompt execution in cover. Some
persons require months to acquire the effective use of a new gun under
difficult circumstances; and in those dense thickets where so much of
our shooting is done, and where it is by instinct founded upon long
habit that the sportsman is enabled at all to kill his game, and where
he cannot indulge in the deliberate care that more open shooting
allows--this deficiency will be most painfully apparent. For such
persons to purchase a new piece, is equivalent to throwing away the
sport of an entire summer or fall, and when we consider that few of us
can expect to average more than forty summers or falls, the loss of
one-fortieth part of life’s enjoyment is no trivial deprivation.
A very cheap gun is dangerous; but it is not expected that any person
reading these lines will trust his life with an instrument that common
sense tells him is manufactured to kill at both ends. A gun of moderate
price, that is, from forty to fifty dollars, is as safe as the most
expensive--the iron is not so tough, but more of it is used; but in a
short time the barrels will wear away; the locks, losing their original
quick spring and sharp click, will become dull and weak, till they will
scarcely discharge the cap; and the stock, warping with the weather,
will exhibit yawning fissures between itself and the iron lock-plates or
false breech.
In lightness, however, is the great superiority of the highly wrought
implement; and in hard tramping through a dense swamp of a hot July day,
or deep wading in a soft snipe-meadow, or in a wearisome trudge over
hill and dale after November quail, a pound will make itself felt in the
additional weight of the fowling-piece, and not only so, but a light gun
can be handled more readily. In open shooting, especially for the wild
fowl of our bays and coasts, mere weight is a positive advantage; but in
the tangled thickets, where birds flash out of sight like gleams of
party-colored light, and the instantaneous use of the piece can alone
secure success, a light gun is an absolute necessity.
Moreover, on certain occasions, when the barrels are exposed to an
extraordinary strain, when the piece built for light charges and upland
shooting is used temporarily upon the larger game of the coasts or
woods, and the two and a half drachms of powder and ounce of fine shot
are replaced by a dozen buck-shot, or an ounce and a half of No. 3
driven by five drachms of powder--then it is pleasant to feel that the
iron is of the utmost possible tenacity and the workmanship in every way
faultless.
A learned dissertation on the science of gunnery is neither appropriate
to the occasion nor possible to the author, and would probably prove as
little entertaining as instructive to the reader. The majority of
purchasers cannot form an exact opinion relative to the merits of a gun
prepared with the utmost skill and ingenuity to deceive them, and must
rely mainly on the word of the seller or reputation of the maker. There
is something, to be sure, in the smooth working of the locks, and still
more in the perfect fitting of the stock; but after all, even to the
experienced sportsman, there is little difference in appearance between
the Shamdamn and the purest laminated steel.
American importers have a peculiarly moral and respectable habit of
vending German guns stamped with the names of English makers, and pacify
their consciences with the idea that the manufactures of Germany are not
inferior to those of England; but they would give more satisfaction to
the public and more ease to their consciences by proving this in open
contest, and establishing the reputation of the German makers, than by
appropriating the names and reputations that good work has made famous.
So far is this deception carried, that some houses even order from the
Belgian manufacturers a certain number, nominally, of each of the
leading gun-makers. It may be that there is little real difference,
although on the continental guns you sometimes pay for useless ornament,
money that should have been expended where it would tell, on locks and
barrels; but the mode of proceeding is certainly not creditable.
In a highly finished article the locks usually work with a smooth
oiliness that can be distinguished with a little practice, and are
fitted with great accuracy into the stock, so that projections of wood
will be left standing not thicker than a piece of blotting-paper. The
barrels will be without flaw or indentation, and if looked through with
the breech removed, will exhibit a perfect ring of light flowing up
evenly, as they are raised or lowered. The mountings will be faultless,
and the cuts in all the screw-heads will point in the same direction;
the screws will work easily and yet perfectly, and the triggers and
trigger-plate, which are invariably neglected in a poor gun, will be
admirably finished and fitted. Examine all these particulars, but
especially the last, and you can form some judgment whether the piece
comes from a good maker or a spurious imitator.
The greatest attention, however, in the selection of a gun should be
paid to the form of the stock and the pull of the triggers; if the
former is unsuited to the shape of the purchaser, or the latter are
stiff or dissimilar, the consequence will be utter failure that no
amount of practice will remedy. If the purchaser’s arms and neck are
long, the stock may be long and crooked; but if the contrary is the
case, the stock must be short and straight.
If possible, the person intending to use a gun should select it for
himself; and if it does not “come up right” the first time he brings it
to his eye, he should refuse it positively. He must not allow himself
to be persuaded to try it again and again; for after one or two trials
he will instinctively adapt his eye to its construction, and will
imagine the gun suits him--an impression that the rapid flight of the
first quail he endeavors to cover will dissipate. The triggers should
give back at a weight of four or five pounds; the hammers of a
muzzle-loader at ten or twelve, and of a breech-loader at twelve or
fourteen. For the former, the best cone is what is called the inverted,
where the bore is larger at the top and receives the entire flame from
the cap.
The shape of the breech for the muzzle-loader formerly gave rise to much
learned disquisition and many plausible theories; but, in all
probability, had no influence on the shooting, which is due mainly to
the form and quality of the barrels. Joe Manton founded his fame on the
idea that the lines of force, if reflected from a hollow cup, like rays
of light from a reflector, would be directed parallel to one another and
lengthwise of the barrel; but later experiments have tended to destroy
this theory. The simple fact appears to be, that powder exerts just so
much force, and, as it cannot escape sideways, it must go out at the end
of the barrel; and that the shape of the breech, except so far as it may
affect the rapidity of ignition, has no influence whatever.
These questions, however, are being effectually disposed of by the march
of events and the general diffusion of breech-loaders; to the latter, as
they are not universally known or appreciated in our country--to which,
by its nature and its game, they are peculiarly adapted--the writer’s
remarks will be mainly confined. Feeling entirely convinced, even from a
short experience, of their superiority in most particulars, and their
equality in all, he regards the consequence as inevitable that they will
utterly supersede the old-fashioned fowling-piece; the few defects that
were originally alleged to exist in them having been either removed or
remedied, and the supply of ammunition for them in this country having
become sufficient. They have won their way slowly into public favor
against the interested opposition of gun-makers on one hand, and the
ignorance and superstitious dread of change of gun-users on the other.
They are a French invention of forty years’ standing, and proved their
superiority long ago; but prejudice was too strong for them, as it has
been for many another good thing. Their merits, nevertheless, slowly
conquered opposition, convinced the intelligent, and confounded the
obstinate; till at last in England--the very hot-bed of prejudice and
the favorite abiding-place of antiquated ideas--there are now sold fifty
breech-loaders to one muzzle-loader. As they are not universally used
with us, the description of them will have to be somewhat minute, and
would be better understood if the reader would take the trouble to
examine one for himself.
The best and most generally adopted of the various kinds is the
_Lefaucheux_, or some slight modification of it; and to that the
attention will be principally directed. In this gun the breech, which
in the muzzle-loader screws into the barrel, is omitted, and the
barrels are open at both ends; they are fastened to the stock by a pin
and joint a few inches beyond the guard. When free, the muzzle hangs
down, and the breech end presents itself several inches above the stock,
so that the cartridge can be readily inserted; when the barrels are
pressed back into their place for firing, they are caught by a bolt that
can be opened or closed by a lever lying along the under part of the
stock, between the guard and the joint. The false breech is flat, solid,
and heavy, and completes the barrels, taking the place and performing
the duty of the breech in the muzzle-loader. The hammers have a flat
surface on the striking end, and the locks are back-actioned, to avoid
interfering with the other mechanism.
The pin cartridge is made of paper, shaped like a short section of the
barrel, with a brass capsule on one end and open at the other; it is two
or three inches long, and has a pad of thick paper beneath the capsule.
In this pad a hole is punched on the inside and the percussion-cap is
inserted, with a brass pin resting in it and projecting above the
capsule on the outside. The percussion-cap is entirely within the
cartridge-case, and the brass pin passes through a hole drilled in one
side of the capsule, just large enough to admit it and exclude moisture
entirely. A blow on the projecting end of the pin drives the other end
into the cap, and discharges the latter. The cartridge-case is prepared
already capped, and is sold in England for from thirty to fifty
shillings the thousand; it may be recapped by an instrument made for the
purpose with a peculiar cap, and may be used, on an average, three
times.
The cartridge must be loaded as the gun would be, only by the use of a
short ramrod or a special loading implement; the powder is poured in, a
wad placed above it, and the shot and another wad follow. The cartridge
may then be trimmed down and the end bent over, so as to retain the load
securely, if it is to be carried for a considerable distance; but where
the shooting is from a boat or stand, the case should be left untrimmed
and of full length. A chamber is cut away in the lower part of the
barrel, which corresponds exactly with the cartridge-case, so that the
latter fits perfectly in it; but, if there is an interval between the
end of the cartridge and the shoulder in the barrel, no injury to the
charge or the shooting appears to result. A small notch is cut in the
upper edge of the barrel to contain the brass pin, and allow it to
project so as to receive the blow from the hammer.
When the bolt is withdrawn and the barrels are allowed to fall so as to
bring the open breech fairly into view, the loaded cartridge is
inserted, the barrels are sprung back to their place with a sharp snap
that sends them home at once, and are ready to be discharged. To allow
the cartridge to be inserted, the hammers must be drawn to half or full
cock; and when the trigger is pulled, they fall upon the pin, which
penetrates the cap and fires the load. The entire mechanism is so simple
that it can hardly become deranged, and will last as long as the
barrels. The greatest care is necessary in making the chamber that
receives the cartridge of a proper shape, for if this is faulty the
cartridges are apt to stick after explosion.
There is no decided improvement on the original Lefaucheux model, except
in the modification of the machinery, and a convenient method of
separating the barrels from the stock; and no other innovation of a like
character need be particularly described. The needle-gun, which is made
on a somewhat similar principle, is more curious than valuable, being
both dangerous and complicated, and possesses no advantages over the
other pattern. In it the cartridge has a percussion-cap so disposed at
its base that it is penetrated by a needle, which is projected by a
spring through a hole in the lower end of the cartridge; but the
composition of the cartridge, and the manner of its insertion, are
altogether different from the same in the Lefaucheux gun.
According to the arrangement of some English guns, on a plan invented by
Jeffries, the lever, instead of closing forward, lies under the
trigger-guard, when the barrels are closed; and provision is made for
tightening the bolt, in case it wears loose by long usage. This
invention permits of the use of forward-action locks, and the easy
separation of the barrels from the stock, and has come into vogue in
England; it is undoubtedly convenient in both these particulars, and has
as yet developed no corresponding drawbacks.
Personally, the writer has always preferred British to French or Belgian
guns, although chance has compelled him to own as many of the latter as
the former. The English gun is made for work; even when cheaply
manufactured, it will be found effective where efficiency is necessary;
and it is far more beautiful to the eye of a true sportsman, with its
plain blued lock-plates, and total deficiency of ornament, than the
Continental weapon, covered with engraving and ornamentation, but
defective in some of those minutiæ that lend nothing to its beauty, but
add much to its usefulness. This is particularly the case with
breech-loaders, which, if not manufactured carefully, are almost
useless, and which, although originally invented in France, are at this
day produced in more serviceable style--unless where the highest-priced
article is obtained--in England than in the country of their origin.
Great discredit was brought upon breech-loaders among us at their first
introduction, in consequence of the importation of inferior articles,
and they still labor under the disadvantages of that failure, although
rapidly overcoming all objections.
There are a few implements that are necessary to the use of a
breech-loader, which are much simpler than they at first appear. To load
the cartridge is required either a short ramrod and a machine for
turning over the edges of the case upon the wad, to retain it in its
place, or an apparatus, also invented by Jeffries, that combines all the
requisites for loading, and by the aid of which a hundred cartridges
can be loaded in an hour. As the case can be used several times, and the
cap, which is of a peculiar size, has to be placed in its exact position
to receive the pin, a capper invented for the purpose is employed, by
which the cap is inserted, and the pin pressed into it without the least
difficulty; a pair of tweezers are used to withdraw the pin after a
discharge, in order to free the old cap and make room for the new, and a
large gimlet will be found useful for extracting any discharged caps
that may happen to stick.
A cleaning-apparatus is also occasionally used, consisting of a brush at
one end of a string and a small weight at the other; the weight is
dropped through the open barrel and the brush drawn after it; but, as
the gun may be fired ten times as often as a muzzle-loader without
fouling, a plain rag and cleaning-rod will answer. Cartridge-cases, of
course, cannot be obtained like powder and shot at every country store,
and to obviate the danger of finding oneself, after extraordinary
good-luck with a gun, without the means of firing it, it is well to
carry a couple of brass cases, which can be used with a common French
cap, and reloaded indefinitely almost as quickly as a muzzle-loader.
The sportsman, by the aid of these implements and a couple of scoops
with handles for powder and shot, recaps the cartridges which have been
discharged, loads them as he would a gun, only much more rapidly, and
lays them aside for future use. In the field, he carries them in a
leather case, or, which is the preferable plan, in a belt round the
waist, or in his pockets, being able to store in the pockets of his vest
alone at least twenty. The English sportsmen carry them loose in the
pockets of their shooting-coats; but a belt is convenient and
commodious, holding from thirty to fifty, and distributes the weight
pleasantly. Where the shooting is to be done from a boat or stand, of
course they will be kept in an ammunition-box, without having their
edges turned over, as there will be nothing to loosen the wads.
The reader may naturally suppose that there is risk in carrying a number
of loaded cartridges about the person; but in this he is entirely
mistaken. In the first place, the difficulty of discharging a cartridge,
except in the gun, is surprising; no pressure will explode the cap, and
no ordinary blow, unless the cartridge is retained in a fixed position;
and if one falls, the weight of the shot compels it inevitably to fall
on the end: but in case these difficulties are overcome, the result is
merely the discharge of a large fire-cracker.
The writer instituted a number of experiments, and having succeeded,
after many trials, in setting off the cartridge, found that the powder
burst the paper, but failed to drive the wad out of the case. This was
tried with cartridges in all positions, horizontal and perpendicular,
but produced invariably the same result, with unimportant modifications;
and it was further ascertained that the fire from one would not
communicate to another. So that, if a cartridge does explode
accidentally, it may scorch the clothes or even burn the person
slightly, but can inflict no serious injury. These remarks, however, do
not apply to the brass cartridge-cases, which must be handled more
carefully. The common paper-cases may therefore be carried with perfect
impunity, and transported, if carefully packed, without risk.
A more curious idea--for the dread of danger from the loaded cartridge
is natural--prevailed at one time, that the barrels were weakened
because they were open behind, instead of being closed by the
breech-screw; as if a cylinder would be rendered more cohesive by
screwing another piece of metal into one end. In fact, if the
breech-screw has any effect whatever upon the strength of the gun, its
presence is probably an injury. The charge, it will be observed, presses
against the shot on one side and the false breech on the other, and
would not be retained any more securely by the addition of a
breech-screw, which tends to separate instead of closing the barrel. So,
also, it must be borne in mind there is no strain worth mentioning on
the hinge-bolt, and no danger of the barrels blowing away with the
charge; while the disposal of the metal at the false breech, and the
omission of the ramrod, tends to make the gun light at the muzzle--a
great advantage in snap-shooting.
There is absolutely no escape of gas at the break-off; none can escape
unless the brass capsule, which closes the joint hermetically, can be
driven out, and this is a sheer impossibility. The gas cannot penetrate
the paper of the cartridge, and if it bursts the latter, still cannot
escape except through the brass; and although the least perceptible
amount may come out alongside of the pin, it is scarcely traceable, and
nothing like what is lost at the percussion-cap in the common gun. These
cartridges are wonderfully close, as the reader may conclude when he is
informed that a loaded breech-loader, left entirely under water for
fifteen minutes, was discharged as promptly as though it had never been
wet; while a muzzle-loader, that had not been half so long exposed,
would not go at all, and required an hour’s cleaning. In fact, the
breech-loader is entirely impervious to any ordinary wetting, will not
fail in the worst rain, and the average number of miss-fires, in well
made cartridges, is one in a thousand.
In the handling of this gun there is one peculiarity: the pins rise from
the middle of the cartridge, and not at one side, like the ordinary
cones, thus bringing the hammers closer together. To the beginner this
may appear awkward, but is no real disadvantage. It would seem also
desirable to use more powder with a breech-loader, although this is not
necessary to so great an extent as it was formerly; but, on the other
hand, the weight at the breech appears either to diminish the recoil or
reduce its effects on the shooter; as the testimony of persons using
breech-loaders is unanimous that the recoil is less perceptible than
with muzzle-loaders, although the scales have refused to verify their
impression.
One immense advantage of the breech-loader is its safety in loading,
especially in a confined position, as on a boat or in a battery.
Whereas, in the muzzle-loader, immediately after the discharge, while
the smoke is still pouring from the barrel, and while the fire may be
smouldering invisible below, the sportsman deliberately pours in a fresh
charge of powder, holding his hand and the entire flask over the muzzle,
endangering his life, and incurring injury far more frequently than most
persons suppose; with the breech-loader, the barrels are opened and fall
into such a position that no discharge can take place, and never point
towards the person of their owner.
Several of the writer’s friends have been maimed for life by the
premature discharge of a load in the muzzle-loader from a spark
remaining in the barrel; the risk connected with it has always seemed
very great; and even with the patent flasks, which are hardly practical
inventions, more or less unavoidable. This danger is entirely obviated
by the breech-loader, which cannot go off until the barrels are restored
to position after the charges are inserted; cannot leave hidden sparks
to imperil the owner’s life or limb; never expose the hand over the
loaded barrel, that may have been left at half-cock, if the sportsman is
liable to thoughtlessness or over-excitement; and which can be loaded
without difficulty in the most confined position. So, not only do we
have rapidity, but entire safety in loading.
[Illustration: GATES OF ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA.]
The objections, however, urged against breech-loaders have not been few,
and, if well founded, forbid the use of the gun; if, as has been said,
the target is not so good, nor the shot sent with as much force, the
requisites of a first-class sporting implement are wanting. These
charges, freely advanced, have been sustained in a measure by the
wretched performance of poor guns, but were early been brought to the
only true test--actual experience, under equal conditions; and by this
test have been so utterly annihilated that their discussion is only
necessary on account of popular ignorance of the experiments. When
breech-loaders first came prominently before the English public, their
supposed merits and demerits were discussed in the sporting papers in an
animated and violent manner; and in order to settle the questions at
issue, the editor of the London _Field_ determined to have an open
trial, where the breech-loaders and muzzle-loaders could be fairly
matched against one another. The contests took place in 1858 and 1859,
and being carefully conducted, settled the dispute for the time being,
and, even before the latest improvements, established more fully the
superiority of the breech-loader. The best guns and gun-makers of
England were represented; and in spite of occasional variation and
accidental luck--as in the pattern of the first muzzle-loader--the
prejudices against the modern arm were so entirely dissipated that the
old-fashioned guns are at present rarely sold.
Since that trial considerable advance has been made in the minutiæ of
the manufacture; and now it is the general impression of those
acquainted with the arm, that the breech-loader, with a slight
additional increase of powder, shoots both stronger and closer than its
rival. In the pigeon-matches, with scarcely an exception, held both in
this country, of late years, as well as in Great Britain, where it is to
be supposed that the best implements the country could furnish would be
used, and where some of the shooting was done at thirty yards, the
favorite and most successful weapons have been breech-loaders. With all
allowance for the quality of the marksman, the quality of the gun that
wins a match at English “blue-rocks” must unquestionably be good; and
this, the universal experience of those matter-of-fact John Bulls, who
test everything by success, has entirely confirmed.
A trial of guns was made in 1859, and the results were published in
tabular form in _The Shot-Gun and Sporting Rifle_, by Stonehenge, p.
304. The targets were made of double bag-cap paper, 90 lbs. to the ream,
circular, thirty inches in diameter, with a centre of twelve inches
square, and were nailed against a smooth surface of deal boards. The
centres were composed of forty thicknesses for forty yards, and twenty
for sixty yards, and weighed eighteen and nine ounces respectively, with
such slight variation as will always occur in brown paper. The powder
was Laurence’s No. 2, the shot No. 6, containing 290 pellets to the
ounce, and the charges were weighed in every instance.
TABLES OF THE FIELD TRIAL.
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
| | | | | |
| |Length |Weight|Charge |Charge|
| | of | of | of | of |
Kind of Gun. |Bore|Barrel.| Gun. |Powder.|Shot. |
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
| | | lb. | | |
| | in. | oz. | drs. | oz. |
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
Muzzle-loader | 12 | 30 | 6.11 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 |
| | | | | |
" | 12 | 30 | 7.6 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 |
" | 12 | 29-1/2| 6.8 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 |
Breech-loader | 12 | 30 | 7.8 | 3 |1-1/4 |
" | 12 | 30 | 7.2 | 3 |1-1/4 |
" | 12 | 30 | 7.0 | 3 |1-1/4 |
Muzzle-loader | 13 | 30 | 7.0 | 2-3/4 |1-1/4 |
Breech-loader | 13 | 29 | 6.10 | 3 |1-1/8 |
Muzzle-loader | 13 | 28 | 6.14 | 2-3/4 |1-1/8 |
| | | | | |
" | 12 | 29-1/2| 6.10 | 2-1/2 |1-3/16|
Breech-loader | 16 | 30 | 7.4 | 3 |1-1/4 |
" | 16 | 28 | 7.4 | 2-3/4 |1 |
" | 13 | 28-1/2| 7.4 | 3 |1-1/3 |
" | 12 | 31 | 7.8 | 3 |1-1/3 |
" | 12 | 30 | 7.4 | 3 |1-1/4 |
" | 13 | 28 | 5.4 | 3 |1 |
" | 14 | 29-1/2| 7.8 | 3 |1-1/3 |
| | | | | |
Averages | | | | | |
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
--------------+---------------------+-----------+>
| | |
| | No. of |
| No. of Marks on | Sheets |
Kind of Gun. | Face of Targets. | pierced. |
--------------+---------------------+-----------+>
| | | |
|at 40 yds.|at 60 yds.| at 40 yds.|
--------------+-----+---------------+-----+-----+>
Muzzle-loader | 158 | 118| 68 | 60 | 28 | 33 |
| | | | | | |
" | 148 | 98| 52 | 65 | 28 | 22 |
" | 116 | 129| 46 | 40 | 25 | 28 |
Breech-loader | 144 | 90| 32 | 58 | 28 | 30 |
" | 103 | 93| 60 | 62 | 24 | 31 |
" | 132 | 93| 55 | 38 | 26 | 33 |
Muzzle-loader | 117 | 71| 47 | 61 | 29 | 37 |
Breech-loader | 65 | 135| 24 | 54 | 29 | 39 |
Muzzle-loader | 113 | 113| 24 | 46 | 23 | 34 |
| | | | | | |
" | 106 | 103| 35 | 31 | 22 | 32 |
Breech-loader | 95 | 105| 50 | 31 | 20 | 27 |
" | 73 | 99| 22 | 42 | 30 | 40 |
" | 97 | 95| 31 | 20 | 22 | 26 |
" | 100 | 77| 32 | 28 | 33 | 25 |
" | 88 | 91| 37 | 31 | 22 | 27 |
" | 90 | 87| 20 | 28 | 20 | 31 |
" | 60 | 48| 31 | 40 | 25 | 23 |
|-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+>
Averages | 106 | 97| 33 | 43 | 26 | 30 |
--------------+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+>
--------------+-----------+--------+--------+---------+
| No. of |Total on| Tot’l | |
| Shots | face |thro’gh | |
| through | of 4 | 4 |Recoil in|
Kind of Gun. | 20 sheets.|targets.|targets.| pounds. |
--------------+-----------+--------+--------+---------+
| | | | |
| at 60 yds.| | | |
--------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
Muzzle-loader | 5 | 2 | 399 | 68 | 68 | 62 |
| | | | | | |
" | 1 | 2 | 363 | 58 | 66 | 65 |
" | 1 | 1 | 331 | 55 | 68 | 64 |
Breech-loader | 0 | 2 | 324 | 60 |untested.|
" | 2 | 4 | 318 | 61 | " |
" | 2 | 3 | 318 | 64 | 70| 68 |
Muzzle-loader | 4 | 8 | 296 | 78 |untested.|
Breech-loader | 0 | 1 | 278 | 69 | 64| 62 |
Muzzle-loader | 0 | 1 | 296 | 58 | 68| 68 |
| | | | | | |
" | 0 | 0 | 275 | 54 | 59| 61 |
Breech-loader | 2 | 0 | 281 | 49 |untested.|
" | 0 | 1 | 236 | 71 | 64| 66 |
" | 0 | 0 | 243 | 48 | 65| 61 |
" | 0 | 0 | 237 | 58 | 72| 69 |
" | 2 | 1 | 247 | 52 | 76| 73 |
" | 1 | 0 | 225 | 52 | 64| 68 |
" | 0 | 0 | 179 | 48 | 74| 68 |
|-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
Averages | 1 |1-1/2| 285 | 59 | 67| 66 |
--------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
| | | | | |
| |Length |Weight|Charge |Charge|
| | of | of | of | of |
Kind of Gun. |Bore|Barrel.| Gun. |Powder.|Shot. |
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
| | | lb. | | |
| | in. | oz. | drs. | oz. |
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
Muzzle loader | 15 | 30 | 6.14 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 |
" | 14 | 28-1/2| 6.11 | 2-1/4 |1-1/3 |
" | 14 | 27 | 5.14 | 2-1/2 |1 |
" | 16 | 31 | 6.12 | 2-1/2 |1 |
" | 14 | 29 | 6.0 | 2-1/4 |1-1/3 |
Breech-loader | 15 | 30 | 6.14 | 8 |1-1/4 |
" | 15 | 29 | 6.8 | 8 |1-1/4 |
Muzzle-loader | 14 | 29 | 6.4 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 |
Breech-loader | 15 | 30 | 7.0 | 8 |1 |
Muzzle-loader | 14 | 30 | 7.0 | 2-3/4 |1 |
" | 15 | 30-1/2| 6.8 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 |
Breech-loader | 15 | 28 | 6.4 | 2-3/4 |1-1/3 |
| | | | | |
Averages | | | | | |
--------------+----+-------+------+-------+------+>
--------------+---------------------+-----------+>
| | |
| | No. of |
| No. of Marks on | Sheets |
Kind of Gun. | Face of Targets. | pierced. |
--------------+---------------------+-----------+>
| | | |
|at 40 yds.|at 60 yds.| at 40 yds.|
--------------+-----+---------------+-----+-----+>
Muzzle loader | 101 | 121| 48 | 55 | 38 | 22 |
" | 147 | 85| 42 | 48 | 24 | 19 |
" | 180 | 92| 30 | 60 | 25 | 27 |
" | 122 | 86| 36 | 57 | 27 | 28 |
" | 101 | 103| 30 | 55 | 21 | 25 |
Breech-loader | 105 | 106| 63 | 26 | 29 | 33 |
" | 129 | 57| 45 | 52 | 20 | 28 |
Muzzle-loader | 99 | 99| 34 | 42 | 32 | 27 |
Breech-loader | 77 | 100| 41 | 31 | 33 | 26 |
Muzzle-loader | 71 | 92| 52 | 27 | 20 | 29 |
" | 83 | 55| 44 | 24 | 28 | 29 |
Breech-loader | 83 | 101| 34 | 7 | 18 | 28 |
|-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+>
Averages | 104 | 92| 42 | 40 | 26 | 27 |
--------------+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+>
--------------+-----------+--------+--------+---------+
| No. of |Total on| Tot’l | |
| Shots | face |thro’gh | |
| through | of 4 | 4 |Recoil in|
Kind of Gun. | 20 sheets.|targets.|targets.| pounds. |
--------------+-----------+--------+--------+---------+
| | | | |
| at 60 yds.| | | |
--------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
Muzzle loader | 8 | 5 | 325 | 68 | 63 | 58 |
" | 0 | 0 | 322 | 48 | 53 | 54 |
" | 2 | 0 | 312 | 54 | 65 | 63 |
" | 2 | 0 | 301 | 57 | 64 | 62 |
" | 0 | 1 | 289 | 47 | 60 | 44 |
Breech-loader | 6 | 1 | 300 | 69 | 69 | 76 |
" | 0 | 3 | 283 | 51 | 64 | 60 |
Muzzle-loader | 0 | 8 | 274 | 67 | 68 | 74 |
Breech-loader | 5 | 0 | 249 | 64 | 71 | 78 |
Muzzle-loader | 0 | 0 | 242 | 49 | 69 | 64 |
" | 5 | 0 | 206 | 62 | 68 | 67 |
Breech-loader | 0 | 0 | 225 | 46 | 68 | 72 |
|-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
Averages | 2 |1-1/2| 277 | 56 | 65 | 64 |
--------------+-----+-----+--------+--------+----+----+
The guns were classified according to their weight. The breech-loaders,
which used one quarter of a drachm more powder, showed about an equal
recoil; the recoil differed surprisingly, ranging from 44 to 76 lbs.,
and was no indication of the power with which the shot was driven--a
greater number of sheets being pierced where the recoil was under the
average. The patterns produced by the muzzle-loaders varied from those
of the breech-loaders less than they did from one another, and far less
than that of one barrel differed from that of the other; in fact, the
right-hand barrel seems to have shot much the best, and some of the guns
that excelled at 40 yards fell far behindhand at 60 yards.
In penetration, which is a more valuable quality in a gun than even
pattern, the breech-loaders took the lead; one pierced through 40 sheets
and another through 39 sheets, so that the vaunted superiority of the
old gun in this particular was found not to exist. It was further noted
that a great improvement in this particular had taken place in the
breech-loaders since the trial of the year previous, which improvement
has been going on steadily since. The trial also proved that, although
the breech-loaders required an extra amount of powder to give them
force, it caused in them no additional recoil, and was objectionable in
so far only as it entailed extra expense and weight of ammunition. The
muzzle-loader was left, to offset its numerous inferiorities, nothing
more than a claim to diminished weight of gun and ammunition, and a
trifling saving in expense; in force and pattern it was equalled; in
safety and handiness it was far surpassed by its competitor.
These trials were continued afterwards, but none were or could be more
conclusive than the first which I have given, and there is no need of
troubling the reader with them. Indeed, it would almost seem unnecessary
to give time and space to the consideration of the superiorities of
breech-loaders over muzzle-loaders at this day, so universally are the
former accepted in the better informed localities, but in so extensive a
country as ours, there are parts which are late to learn and hard to be
convinced. To-day, while the muzzle-loader has nearly disappeared from
the Northern and Eastern States, it still holds its own in the South and
far West, and there are at present as many of them in service throughout
the length and breadth of our land, as there are of breech-loaders.
One change that was early made in the cartridges was to do away with the
pin and substitute a central fire, and so much was this change admired,
that pin-fire guns have almost gone out of use. Nevertheless, I have
never been convinced that this was any improvement, and believe, that if
the pin-fire gun had come into general use before it was introduced, it
would not have been accepted. However, admitted facts cannot be ignored,
and to-day the pin-fire system has been almost as fully and far less
intelligently relegated to the past, as the muzzle-loader itself. I am
also no admirer of the snapaction, which has to a certain extent been
substituted for the lever, on the ground that, while the lever never
gets out of order, the spring of the snap often breaks. I may say, that
no guns could have been more severely tried than mine that were
manufactured by _Lefaucheux_, one of which was the second that was ever
permanently used in this country, and that they have never given out in
their working parts, while the oldest and most hardly used has never
given out at all, although shot in all weathers and under very trying
circumstances.
Indeed I go farther and insist that there have been no important
improvements made in breech-loaders since the original _Lefaucheux_
pattern until the introduction of the hammerless guns. These are still
imperfect, but they will probably be soon perfected, so that the last
serious danger from a breech-loader will be removed, that of premature
discharge in the field. Were it not for this discovery, it is my belief
that sportsmen would yet give up the central-fire, and return to the
pin-fire, there being no advantages in a central fire, while there are
several disadvantages. The principal of these consists in the fact that
no one can tell whether it is loaded or not, and a secondary danger lies
in the loading of the cartridges, which has already cost several lives.
As yet, however, the hammerless gun is not entirely safe. It is thrown
back to full cock in opening, and when closed with a hard snap it will
sometimes jar off. This happens very rarely, but often enough to make
the gun dangerous.
It will foul about the working parts of the breech when it is used hard
without cleaning, so that the springs will not act, and a premature
discharge may follow, and it sometimes catches on the edge of the bent
in the tumbler without slipping into it. As soon as these defects are
absolutely remedied, the graceful and convenient hammerless gun will
take the place of all others. I know very well it is claimed that these,
and all other defects have been removed by the introduction of the
safety block, which interposes before the tumbler, and thus between the
strikers and the cap, and I do not intend to enter into an argument
which would lead to no practical result. There are men ever ready to
take certain risks in order to be ahead of their fellows. Let such
disregard the advice, which common sense suggests, and make experiments,
from which they cannot be dissuaded, and by which others may profit. I
would, however, say that I am sustained in my objections by so high an
authority, as “Stonehenge,” but am willing to admit that even as they
are, I think a hammerless gun is safer than a central fire, for they
avoid one of the greatest risks which the sportsman runs, that of the
trigger catching on a twig as he is going through the bushes. Those who
have used them sufficiently to get accustomed to them, say that they can
shoot better with them than with the old gun, a fact which they
attribute to the absence of the hammers.