CHAPTER II.

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, about one hundred 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 buckshot, 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 generally 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 twenty 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 five

breech-loaders to one muzzle-loader. As they are not extensively 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.

A cartridge is made of stout 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 farther 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.

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 have finally 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-match between the nobility and gentry of England in

1863, described in the London _Field_, volume xxiii., p. 389, where it

is to be supposed that the best implements the country could furnish

were used, and where some of the shooting was done at thirty yards, the

first and second prizes were both taken by 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.

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

| | | | | |

Name of Maker. | Kind of Gun. |Bore.| Length of |Weight of | Charge of |

| | | Barrel. | Gun. | Powder. |

| | | | | |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

| | | in. | lb. oz. | drs. |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

Pape, Newcastle | Muzzle-loader | 12 | 30 | 6.11 | 2¾ |

Prince & Green, London| “ | 12 | 30 | 7.6 | 2¾ |

Pape | “ | 12 | 29½ | 6.8 | 2¾ |

Egen, Bradford | Breech-loader | 12 | 30 | 7.8 | 3 |

Prince & Green | “ | 12 | 30 | 7.2 | 3 |

Pape | “ | 12 | 30 | 7.0 | 3 |

Pape | Muzzle-loader | 13 | 30 | 7.0 | 2¾ |

Needham, London | Breech-loader | 13 | 29 | 6.10 | 3 |

Egan | Muzzle-loader | 13 | 28 | 6.14 | 2¾ |

Culling, Dowtham | | | | | |

Market | “ | 12 | 29½ | 6.10 | 2½ |

Reilly, London | Breech-loader | 16 | 30 | 7.4 | 3 |

Elliott, Birmingham | “ | 16 | 28 | 7.4 | 2¾ |

Needham | “ | 13 | 28½ | 7.4 | 3 |

Hast, Colchester | “ | 12 | 31 | 7.8 | 3 |

Reilly | “ | 12 | 30 | 7.4 | 3 |

Elliott | “ | 13 | 28 | 5.4 | 3 |

Francotte, Liege | “ | 14 | 29½ | 7.8 | 3 |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

| Averages | | | | |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

----------------------+-----------+----------------------+----------+----------->

| | | | No. of |

Name of Maker. | Charge of | No. of Marks on | No. of | shots |

| Shot. | Face of Targets. | Sheets | through |

| | | pierced. |20 sheets. |

----------------------+-----------+-----------+----------+----------+----------->

| oz. |at 40 yds. |at 60 yds.|at 40 yds.| at 60 yds.|

----------------------+-----------+-----------+----+-----+----+-----+-----+----->

Pape, Newcastle | 1¼ | 158 | 118 | 63 | 60 | 28 | 33 | 5 | 2 |

Prince & Green, London| 1¼ | 148 | 98 | 52 | 65 | 28 | 22 | 1 | 2 |

Pape | 1¼ | 116 | 129 | 46 | 40 | 25 | 28 | 1 | 1 |

Egen, Bradford | 1¼ | 144 | 90 | 32 | 58 | 28 | 30 | 0 | 2 |

Prince & Green | 1¼ | 103 | 93 | 60 | 62 | 24 | 31 | 2 | 4 |

Pape | 1¼ | 132 | 93 | 55 | 38 | 26 | 33 | 2 | 3 |

Pape | 1¼ | 117 | 71 | 47 | 61 | 29 | 37 | 4 | 8 |

Needham, London | 1⅛ | 65 | 135 | 24 | 54 | 29 | 39 | 0 | 1 |

Egan | 1⅛ | 113 | 113 | 24 | 46 | 23 | 34 | 0 | 1 |

Culling, Dowtham | | | | | | | | | |

Market | 1-3/16 | 106 | 103 | 35 | 31 | 22 | 32 | 0 | 0 |

Reilly, London | 1¼ | 95 | 105 | 50 | 31 | 20 | 27 | 2 | 0 |

Elliott, Birmingham | 1 | 73 | 99 | 22 | 42 | 30 | 40 | 0 | 1 |

Needham | 1⅛ | 97 | 95 | 31 | 20 | 22 | 26 | 0 | 0 |

Hast, Colchester | 1⅛ | 100 | 77 | 32 | 28 | 33 | 25 | 0 | 0 |

Reilly | 1¼ | 88 | 91 | 37 | 31 | 22 | 27 | 2 | 1 |

Elliott | 1 | 90 | 87 | 20 | 28 | 20 | 31 | 1 | 0 |

Francotte, Liege | 1⅛ | 60 | 48 | 31 | 40 | 25 | 23 | 0 | 0 |

----------------------+-----------+-----+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+----->

| | 106 | 97 | 33 | 43 | 26 | 30 | 1 |1½ |

----------------------+-----------+-----+-----+----+-----+----------+-----+----->

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----------

| | |

Name of Maker. | Total on face | Tot’l thro’gh | Recoil in

| of 4 targets. | 4 targets. | pounds.

| | |

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----------

| | |

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----+-----

Pape, Newcastle | 399 | 68 | 68 | 62

Prince & Green, London| 363 | 53 | 66 | 65

Pape | 331 | 55 | 68 | 64

Egen, Bradford | 324 | 60 |untested.

Prince & Green | 3 8 | 61 | “

Pape | 318 | 64 | 70 | 68

Pape | 296 | 78 |untested.

Needham, London | 278 | 69 | 64 | 62

Egan | 296 | 58 | 68 | 68

Culling, Dowtham | | | |

Market | 275 | 54 | 59 | 61

Reilly, London | 281 | 49 |untested.

Elliott, Birmingham | 236 | 71 | 64 | 66

Needham | 243 | 48 | 65 | 61

Hast, Colchester | 237 | 58 | 72 | 69

Reilly | 247 | 52 | 76 | 73

Elliott | 225 | 52 | 64 | 68

Francotte, Liege | 179 | 48 | 74 | 68

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----+-----

| 285 | 59 | 67 | 66

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----+-----

TABLES OF THE FIELD TRIAL.

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

| | | | | |

Name of Maker. | Kind of Gun. |Bore.| Length of |Weight of | Charge of |

| | | Barrel. | Gun. | Powder. |

| | | | | |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

| | | in. | lb. oz. | drs. |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

O. Smith, Derby | Muzzle-loader | 15 | 30 | 6.14 | 2¾ |

Culling | “ | 14 | 28½ | 6.11 | 2¼ |

Dougall, Glasgow | “ | 14 | 27 | 5.14 | 2½ |

Joe Manton, London | “ | 16 | 31 | 6.12 | 2½ |

Culling | “ | 14 | 29 | 6.0 | 2¼ |

Reilly | Breech-loader | 15 | 30 | 6.14 | 3 |

Lang, London | “ | 15 | 29 | 6.8 | 3 |

Reilly | Muzzle-loader | 14 | 29 | 6.4 | 2¾ |

Prince & Green | Breech-loader | 15 | 30 | 7.0 | 3 |

Prince & Green | Muzzle-loader | 14 | 30 | 7.0 | 2¾ |

Hast | “ | 15 | 30½ | 6.8 | 2¾ |

Reilly | Breech-loader | 15 | 28 | 6.4 | 2¾ |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

| Averages | | | | |

----------------------+----------------+-----+-----------+----------+----------->

----------------------+-----------+----------------------+----------+----------->

| | | | No. of |

Name of Maker. | Charge of | No. of Marks on | No. of | shots |

| Shot. | Face of Targets. | Sheets | through |

| | | pierced. |20 sheets. |

----------------------+-----------+-----------+----------+----------+----------->

| oz. |at 40 yds. |at 60 yds.|at 40 yds.| at 60 yds.|

----------------------+-----------+-----+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+----->

O. Smith, Derby | 1⅛ | 101 | 121 | 48 | 55 | 38 | 22 | 3 | 5 |

Culling | 1⅛ | 147 | 85 | 42 | 48 | 24 | 19 | 0 | 0 |

Dougall, Glasgow | 1 | 130 | 92 | 30 | 60 | 25 | 27 | 2 | 0 |

Joe Manton, London | 1 | 122 | 86 | 86 | 57 | 27 | 28 | 2 | 0 |

Culling | 1⅛ | 101 | 103 | 30 | 55 | 21 | 25 | 0 | 1 |

Reilly | 1¼ | 105 | 106 | 63 | 26 | 29 | 33 | 6 | 1 |

Lang, London | 1¼ | 129 | 57 | 45 | 52 | 20 | 28 | 0 | 3 |

Reilly | 1⅛ | 99 | 99 | 34 | 42 | 32 | 27 | 0 | 8 |

Prince & Green | 1 | 77 | 100 | 41 | 31 | 33 | 26 | 5 | 0 |

Prince & Green | 1 | 71 | 92 | 52 | 27 | 20 | 29 | 0 | 0 |

Hast | 1⅛ | 83 | 55 | 44 | 24 | 28 | 29 | 5 | 0 |

Reilly | 1⅛ | 83 | 101 | 34 | 7 | 18 | 28 | 0 | 0 |

----------------------+-----------+-----+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+----->

| | 104 | 92 | 42 | 40 | 26 | 27 | 2 |1½|

----------------------+-----------+-----+-----+----+-----+----+-----+-----+----->

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----------

| | |

Name of Maker. | Total on face | Tot’l thro’gh | Recoil in

| of 4 targets. | 4 targets. | pounds.

| | |

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----------

| | |

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----+-----

O. Smith, Derby | 325 | 68 | 68 | 58

Culling | 322 | 43 | 53 | 54

Dougall, Glasgow | 312 | 54 | 65 | 68

Joe Manton, London | 301 | 57 | 64 | 62

Culling | 289 | 47 | 60 | 44

Reilly | 300 | 69 | 69 | 76

Lang, London | 283 | 51 | 64 | 60

Reilly | 274 | 67 | 68 | 74

Prince & Green | 249 | 64 | 71 | 73

Prince & Green | 242 | 49 | 69 | 64

Hast | 206 | 63 | 68 | 67

Reilly | 225 | 46 | 68 | 72

----------------------+---------------+---------------+-----+-----

| 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.

A book called the _Dead Shot_, which has been circulated extensively in

our country, remarkable more for the wonderful number of mistakes, if

not absurdities, that it contains, than for any other quality, denounces

the breech-loaders in unmeasured terms, and, among others, gives the

following categorical objections, to each of which the writer appends,

from personal experience, what he considers an answer. The _Dead Shot_

says:

“1. The breech-loader does not shoot so strong nor kill so far as the

muzzle-loader, though allowed a quarter of a drachm of powder extra.”

The contrary was proved at the _Field_ trial, as shown by the foregoing

tables, and is proved in the field daily.

“2. The breech-loader is, of necessity, much heavier than a

muzzle-loader of the same gauge.”

About one quarter of a pound.

“3. It is more expensive as regards ammunition, and also as to the gun

itself--the latter by reason of its not lasting so long, and its greater

liability to get out of repair than a muzzle-loader.”

The cartridge-cases cost about twenty dollars a thousand; so that if

they are used but once, a single additional quail or woodcock will pay

for ten of them. The same wise economy raised this objection of expense

against percussion-caps when first introduced. The gun lasts longer, as

there is no breech to become rusty or burnt out with percussion powder,

and the barrels may always be kept in perfect cleanliness.

“4. The recoil on discharge is heavier and the report louder than that

produced by the muzzle-loader.”

The first portion of this paragraph is answered by the foregoing tables,

and the second is not only false but childish.

“5. The penetration of wet and damp in rains, fogs, or mists, between

the false breech and barrels, and often into the cartridge itself,

cannot be avoided in the present form of breech-loader, more especially

in one that has been much used. And if the cartridge-case gets damp, it

adheres to the barrel, and cannot be removed without considerable

difficulty.”

That rain cannot penetrate the cartridge-case is pretty well proved by

the experience already mentioned of firing a gun that had been under

water fifteen minutes; and if dampness gets in between the false breech

and barrels, or under the latter, the parts should be wiped dry after

use. The residue of this paragraph is answered below.

“6. There is obviously a greater risk of bursting; indeed, the safety of

a breech-loader, after much usage, becomes doubtful by reason of the

escape of gas between the false breech and barrels, particularly after

the trying vibrations of heavy charges.”

There is no such escape of gas, and “obviously” can be none, unless it

can find its way through nearly a quarter of an inch of solid paper and

brass. Does the comparatively excessive escape of gas at the cone and

vent of a muzzle-loader endanger its safety? and will the “trying

vibration” of one cartridge affect the strength of another not in the

barrel at the time?

“7. The time and trouble required in filling the cartridges, and the

danger attending that operation before going out shooting, are very

considerable; and it is with one peculiar form of cartridge only that

the breech-loader can be used; and if purchased of the gun-maker ready

filled, they come very expensive.”

This paragraph is unanswerable; as no source of danger in loading the

cartridges is specified, the writer is at a loss to know what is

meant--there being, in his experience, no danger whatever. As for the

trouble, it is far less than that of loading the gun.

“8. The operation of _making_ and filling the cartridge is to a

sportsman a tedious, dirty, dangerous, and laborious one--quite as much

so as making fireworks.”

This may be true of making the cartridges, which no sportsman ever

thinks of doing more than he would of making percussion-caps, which is a

far more dangerous employment. The filling them is identically the same

as loading a gun, omitting capping, but without its dirt or danger. If

loading a gun is akin to making fireworks, so may be loading cartridges.

In fact, using cartridges is merely loading at a convenient season

expeditiously, and may be done to the extent of thousands without

soiling the hands.

“9. Another serious objection to the breech-loader is the weight of

ammunition that must be carried in the shape of ready-made cartridges

when going to the Highlands or any remote shooting quarter. And then

arises the difficulty of keeping them perfectly dry in damp weather; and

every one knows how very soon the damp will penetrate through a paper

case, and cake, and weaken the force of the gunpowder.”

If the cartridge cases are carried unloaded, the bulk of ammunition is

increased; if loaded--and they are as safe as powder in mass--neither

the weight nor bulk is at all increased. The powder might be injured in

very damp weather in the course of years; but such an occurrence has not

yet come before the public.

“10. The cartridges must be carried in a strong case with divisional

compartments. In the event of their being carried loose, they become

damaged; and the danger of so carrying them is excessive, by reason of

the results which may ensue in the event of a fall or accident in

getting over a hedge, or otherwise, whereby a blow or friction is given

to the metal pin which explodes the cap.”

Friction will not discharge them, and no ordinary blow; and, in case of

explosion, the danger is merely what may result from the discharge of a

charge of powder in the open air--by no means so great, but about as

probable as from the explosion of the caps in the cap-pocket. The writer

has never heard of such an occurrence, and English sportsmen

universally carry cartridges loose in their pockets.

“11. The extra weight incurred in being obliged to carry a sufficient

number of cartridges for a day’s sport, in a very cumbersome leather

case, with iron compartments, considerably exceeds the ordinary weight

of powder-flask and shot-pouch, with ammunition for a similar amount of

sport.”

This may be, if any one is fool enough to use iron compartments; but in

a proper receptacle--a leather belt--the weight is much less.

“12. Another of the principal defects in the breech-loader is the flat

surface of the breech, which scientific and practical experimenters have

proved to be erroneous, by reason of the much greater power and extra

force which may be obtained from the conical interior form of solid

breech--the rule being that ‘force cannot be expended and retained

also;’ and as it must, of necessity, be expended to a certain degree by

explosion and recoil on a flat-surfaced breech, extra powder is required

to produce like effects to those which result from the solid conical

breech. The recoil is also considerably greater on a flat surface than

on a tapering one.”

So much of the foregoing as is comprehensible, the tables of the _Field_

trial “and practical experimenters” have found to be erroneous. It will

also be borne in mind that the inside end of the cartridge-case is

conical.

“13. Joints, joinings, slides, and bolts, are all inferior to a

well-made screw, as regards soundness of the breech. A perfectly solid

breech, free from all suspicious joinings, curves, and openings, _must

be_ by far the safer and more effective one in any instrument, in which

so searching a substance as gunpowder has to be compressed and

exploded.”

If this last objection is correct the others are superfluous, as it

disposes of the discussion; and the statement will be true whenever it

can be shown that the cohesion of a tube is increased by forcing a screw

into it. To silence, however, such senseless cavils, gun-makers

construct the breech end of the barrels slightly heavier than in the

muzzle-loader.

These being the greater disadvantages, the _Dead Shot_ then adverts to

the minor ones:

“On reloading, it is necessary to draw out the case of the discharged

cartridge before inserting a full one. _It is true the discharged

cartridge may generally be withdrawn almost instantly_; but if intended

to be refilled and used another day, it must be carefully replaced in

the cartridge-case in one of the divisional compartments, for if carried

loose in the pocket it is soon spoilt. Therefore, if these important

minutiæ be taken into consideration, it will be found, after all, that

there is very little saving of time in re-charging the breech-loader.”

This is the acme of captiousness; as though the cases might not be

placed in the pocket till a favorable opportunity presented to return

them to their compartments. To any one who, with numbed hands on a

bitterly cold December morning, is watching for ducks at daybreak, and

who looks to reloading as a difficulty and recapping an impossibility,

the large, easily handled cartridge is a blessing that he will never

forget; and any one who, having used a breech-loader, will pretend that

it cannot be loaded on the average infinitely faster than the

muzzle-loader, is guilty of prevarication. In truth it can be reloaded

in less time than the other gun can be recapped.

“With regard to refilling the cartridge-cases, the makers warrant that

the discharged cases may be refilled and used again with the same

facility and effect, some of them two or three times. This, however, is

not always so; on the contrary, the cases expand so much on explosion of

the powder, that when refilled they are sometimes not only difficult to

thrust into the barrel, but on second explosion they stick so fast that

in many instances the copper end comes off, on the case being attempted

to be withdrawn, and the paper is left inside. And then, unless a

loading-rod is at hand with which to force out the paper case, your

breech-loader is powerless.”

Were it not for the next clause, one could suppose that _Dead Shot_ had

never heard of an extractor, which is a little instrument not so large

as a cone wrench, always carried in the shooter’s pocket, and with which

the paper can be pulled out in about two seconds’ time, without

possibility of failure; until this is done, and for those two seconds,

“your breech-loader is indeed powerless.”

“None but those who have experienced the difficulty of extracting a

bursted cartridge-case, which adheres firmly to the sides of the

barrel, can imagine the annoyance it causes; and if the cases get damp,

or if refilled ones are used, the difficulty is constantly occurring.

And then the ‘extractor’ is of little use, beyond pulling away the brass

bottom of the cartridge and leaving the paper case more difficult to

remove.”

New cases, whether they burst or not, scarcely ever stick in passably

well-made guns, and reloaded ones rarely; but when they do, the

extractor will, in nine times out of ten, withdraw them at once; and if

on this tenth occasion the brass capsule is torn off, the extractor, by

the aid of a hook at the end, made expressly for the purpose, will tear

out the empty paper instantly.

“Unless the brass pin which explodes the cap is made very precisely, a

miss-fire is inevitable. If there is any corrosive substance upon it or

upon the sides of the hollow in which it is to travel, the hammer will

fail to drive it home or explode the cap. The hammer must strike it in

exact position, or the pin will bend; any extra length or protrusion of

the pin, or any dampness or foulness which causes it to stick, or if the

pin be nipped in any way so as to weaken the force of the hammer, a

miss-fire will probably be the result; and the pins must not be too

loose, or they will drop out of the cartridges on any sudden or violent

exertion on the part of the sportsman.”

All but the last clause of this paragraph is prejudice stated as fact,

and that is simply ridiculous. It happened that one hammer of the

writer’s breech-loader was broken and so badly mended that it did not

fall true upon the pin, and yet the only miss-fires he has ever met with

arose from his own neglect, in omitting to recap one or two of the

discharged cartridges before reloading. The average of miss-fires with a

cartridge is asserted by Mr. Eley, the celebrated gun-maker, to be one

in a thousand--an assertion openly made, and, as yet, uncontroverted,

and which is confirmed by the experience of the writer and his friends.

So far from the pin’s being liable to fall out by any exertion whatever,

even if the sportsman turned acrobat for the nonce, it is simply to be

said that it cannot be withdrawn with the fingers, and requires a small

pair of pliers.

“If in drawing out an unexploded cartridge the brass end comes off or

breaks away from the paper case, _it will not be advisable to use the

cartridge in that state_: it cannot be safe to explode it in the barrel

of a breech-loading gun; in fact, it would be almost as unsafe as a

loose charge of powder. _And in the event of the cap missing fire in a

breech-loading cartridge, it is not desirable to recap the cartridge._

When once the brass and the pasteboard part company, the power of

retaining the explosive force within the case is considerably weakened,

and so is the expulsive force.”

On reading the foregoing, one would suppose the author of such

statements had never seen a breech-loader. Where the brass end breaks

away from the paper case, the cap comes off with it, and the cartridge

cannot be discharged unless touched off with a lucifer match or a

lighted cigar--a performance that probably few persons out of a lunatic

asylum would attempt. And as for recapping a cartridge that once missed

fire, it cannot be done, _as the cap is inside_. What species of

cartridges the _Dead Shot_ must have used, the writer of this cannot

imagine. In case of a miss-fire the cartridge has to be unloaded, and

may then be recapped and reloaded like any other.

The writer experimented extensively in reloading cartridges, using some

a dozen times, and has experienced the annoyance of sticking cases and

separating capsules, and tested it thoroughly; and he must say that if a

cartridge is loaded over three times with heavy loads it is apt to

stick, especially if it is loaded shortly after being discharged, and

while it is still soft from the heat. The cases should be left for

several hours before they are reloaded, until they are dry and hard,

and, if there is time, should be reloaded in the mould--a block bored

out to the exact size, in which they fit accurately, and in which they

cannot spread.

They rarely stick, however, before the third discharge, and then may be

pulled out by force--in pieces, if necessary, and thrown away. If,

however, they cannot be forced in, and are torn apart before they are

discharged, which never happens except after repeated use, the charge is

wasted; the powder should be at once poured out, the wads pushed aside

by the extractor to let the shot escape by the muzzle, and the empty

case torn away--an operation implying neither danger nor difficulty. It

is desirable to pour the shot out at the muzzle, lest a pellet lodge

under the breech-end of the gun and interfere with its operation.

“The rapidity with which a succession of shots may be made is urged as

one of the chief recommendations of the breech-loader; but rapidity of

firing is seldom desired, _and the barrels may become heated to danger_.

The sportsman’s every-day success frequently depends on the range of his

gun, but seldom on the loading and firing of it.”

The _Dead Shot_ is an English book; and in England there are no rail or

bay-snipe; the author, therefore, has never whistled a flock of

marble-winged willet or golden-brown marlin back, time after time, to

the fatal stand, and delivered repeated discharges into their thinning

ranks. But ducks abound there; and for any person who has been present

at the early morning or late evening flight, and has seen and heard the

rush of wings innumerable, when a dozen guns and men to load them would

hardly have been enough, to say that “rapidity of firing is seldom

desirable,” is marvellous indeed. The italicized portion of the last

objection further implies that _Dead Shot_ has never used a

breech-loader; for, while in the muzzle-loader the heat of repeated

discharges may be dangerous, in a breech-loader it cannot, as paper

intervenes between the barrel and the powder. The writer has fired his

breech-loader until it was so hot he could not bear his hand on it.

This is the last of _Dead Shot’s_ objections, and none of them merit the

attention they have received, except from the fact that this book has

been extensively circulated in our country, where the merits of

breech-loaders are little known. The objections so manifestly arise from

prejudice or ignorance, that they need no contradiction to any one

acquainted with the true state of the case, and are worthy of an author

who, in his opening, says: “He only can be called a ‘Dead Shot’ who can

bring down with unerring precision an October or November partridge,

whenever it offers a fair chance, _i. e._ rises within certain range;”

which range he afterwards, at page 86, puts at forty yards, in the

following words: “With judicious loading and a regard to the principles

of deadly range, a partridge may be killed with certainty at forty

yards.” The partridge resembles, in many points, our quail, and

sportsmen can tell whether quail can be killed “with certainty at forty

yards,” or whether the best shot alive can kill them every time at any

distance.

In discussing the merits of any new invention, prejudice is one of the

strongest grounds of opposition to overcome; and prejudice in favor of a

weapon that we have tried and found trustworthy, that years of service

have enabled us to use skilfully and have endeared to our affections,

that has never, under all diversities of trial, failed to merit our

confidence, is not merely a natural but praiseworthy feeling in the

human mind. Prejudice, when at last driven to a corner and forced to

give up as untenable the objection to the safety or shooting qualities

of the breech-loader, will say: “I can shoot fast enough with a

muzzle-loader.”

For woodcock and quail-shooting, rapidity in loading is not essential,

although frequently after a bevy of quail has flushed, one or two birds

will loiter long enough to be killed by the reloaded breech-loader, that

would fly before the muzzle-loader could be recharged. But for killing

English snipe, that have a habit of rising one after another in

tantalizing succession before the unloaded gun; for ducks and rail; but

above all for bay-snipe, one-half if not two-thirds of the bag depends

upon celerity in loading. Duck shooting is frequently best in wet

weather, when even Eley’s “central fire double water-proof” caps will

not always insure the ignition of the powder; and in thick covert the

caps, especially if they do not fit perfectly, will occasionally be

brushed off; whereas the breech-loader is impervious to wet, and is not

liable to the last difficulty; above all, where different kinds of game

are expected, and it may be important to change quickly the load for

ducks, to buckshot for deer, or double B’s for geese, the breech-loader

has an infinite superiority.

The comparative merits of the two guns may be stated as follows:

For shooting quail or woodcock, where there is no necessity for great

rapidity in firing, there is little advantage in a breech-loader; and,

unless loaded cartridges sufficient for the entire trip are carried, the

reloading them during the evening after a hard day’s fag will be found

annoying. But for all the shore-birds, and even for English snipe, the

breech-loader has an immense advantage. It requires a quarter of a

drachm of powder extra, and, on this account as well as from the cost of

the cases, is more expensive in use; with the extra allowance of powder,

however, it shoots stronger, with as good a patten and as little recoil

as its rival; it is somewhat heavier to carry, infinitely safer to load,

rarely misses fire, and may be cleaned ere the tow can be prepared for

the muzzle-loader.

Of course the better the barrels, the better it will shoot, to a greater

degree even than the old gun; and it is being daily made more perfect.

The weight has already been reduced, for field-guns even of No. 12 bore,

to six pounds ten ounces, which is as light as any double-gun should be,

and the mechanism of the parts is very fine. Of course the friction on

the hinge will in the end wear it loose, but the expense of a new one is

trifling, and its construction might almost be entrusted to a country

blacksmith. The barrels are said to spring slightly at the discharge

when the load is heavy, so that a piece of thin paper pasted across at

the break-off along the ridge will be rent; and, on the other hand, Mr.

Dougall, of Glasgow, claims to have made an invention called by him the

“Lockfast,” that removes this difficulty. The objection, however, is not

important; and Mr. Dougall’s invention, by which the barrels slip into a

shoulder-cut on the face of the breech, is considerably slower in action

than the other patterns: it cannot be made to spring shut like the

Lefaucheux, but must be drawn back into place by a short lever.

The price of a superior breech-loader, made by Jeffery of Guildford,

several of whose make have been imported and given entire satisfaction,

is thirty guineas, and by Dougall of Glasgow about forty guineas,

although of course the price varies to suit purses; and some of the best

London makers, who spare neither labor nor expense, and who turn out

work that is unsurpassable, charge double these sums. It has even been

asserted that Purdey has received over a hundred pounds for a

breech-loader; but this is merely a fancy price, and makes the gun

neither safer nor more useful than one at a third of the cost.

A breech-loader to shoot creditably must be well made, and consequently

is expensive; and at the best an extra quarter drachm of powder must be

allowed. This is supposed to be required by the yielding of the

comparatively soft material of the cartridge-case, which must fit rather

loosely in the chamber of the barrel to allow of its ready insertion,

and any defect of workmanship increases this difficulty materially.

There are several descriptions of cartridge--those made by Eley of

England or Gevelot of France being the best. Eley manufactures two

qualities at different prices, and those persons who object to reloading

their cartridges, may purchase the lower-priced article, which is not

intended to be used more than once. The first quality cost three pounds

a thousand, unloaded but capped; or they may be purchased at a

proportionally higher price loaded, ready for instant use, as they can

be transported even across the ocean without material risk. The

brown-paper cartridges of Chaudun are also good, but not quite so fine

an article as Eley’s; they may be reloaded, however, several times. In

carrying the loaded cartridges, it is natural to suppose that there

would be danger of their exploding in consequence of a sudden jar, and

they are generally packed in sawdust to avoid this risk, but experience

has proved that the danger is slight; generally speaking, they cannot be

so discharged, and there is but one case reported where it happened; in

this instance, a railway porter in England let fall a large box of them,

when a single cartridge exploded, without doing any damage or

discharging the others.

There are, properly speaking, no gun-makers in America; a few workmen

import English locks, stocks, and barrels, and fitting them together,

stamp them with their names; but I know of no establishment where the

smallest portion even of the fowling-piece is manufactured. It is a

matter of great difficulty to get any good work done, and the simplest

repairs are generally bungled in our best shops in a way to disgrace the

trade and disgust the owner; as for having a gun made, we have not

advanced the first step towards it, not even having a compulsory

proof-stamp.

It is hardly necessary to add that breech-loaders must be imported. They

and their equipment are kept for sale at our principal metropolitan

shops, and their mechanism is so simple that any accident to it can be

repaired; but as they are not in general demand, really fine articles

are difficult to find, and had better be purchased specially on the

other side. This can be done by the party himself, by sending to any

European maker the length from the foremost trigger to the heel-plate,

and the drop from the line of the barrels to the cheek-piece of the

stock--that exist in his present gun, and which he wishes to retain. Or

any of our dealers will take the measure of his gun, and import him a

breech-loader that will “come up” like the old gun he has handled for

years.

Much space has been devoted to the breech-loader, for the reason that

the writer, while recognising its adaptability to general use, has

considered it specially advantageous for the pursuit of the game of

which this work particularly treats; that it has defects is not denied,

but these are vastly overborne by its advantages. Prejudice is strong;

for twenty years the Lefaucheux has been in common use among the French,

who had satisfied themselves of its superiority; and it required that

time for an invention so simple and easy to test, to cross the narrow

channel between the continent and England. Americans are always ready to

try a new discovery and judge of its advantages by their own experience;

so that it is not probable that the breech-loader will be as long in

crossing the “broad Atlantic,” and locating itself securely on our

shores.

There are now some twenty or thirty of these guns in use among our

sportsmen, and they have generally given satisfaction. Of course it

requires a short time to accustom oneself to a new implement; and a

cheap piece, which it is natural to purchase on an experiment, is a poor

affair, and especially so with a breech-loader; but the invention is

steadily winning friends. In England, where the nature of the game is

not so well calculated for its use as here, the highest authority on

sporting gunnery, the editor of the _Field_, who writes under the name

of Stonehenge, speaking of the two guns, says: “Indeed, so near is the

performance of the two, that we cannot think for a moment that for

general purposes there can be a doubt of the superiority of the

breech-loader, when quickness of loading, safety, and cleanliness are

taken into consideration.”

The Game-Birds of the Coasts and Lakes of the Northern States of America A full account of the sporting along our sea-shores and inland waters, with a comparison of the merits of breech-loaders and muzzle-loaders · 第 2 / 11 章