height of the cheeks and diameter of the trucks must conform to the
height of the gun-ports above the deck. The carriages of the lower tiers
should therefore be so formed, that when the breech of the cannon lies
upon the hind axle-tree, the muzzle of the piece should touch above the
port, as expressed in fig. 19. which represents a cannon secured by its
tackles and breechings, to prevent it from straining the ship as she
rolls in a stormy sea.
Cannon are charged by putting down into the bottom first a quantity of
powder, one third or one half the weight of the ball. This is done with
an instrument, fig. 7. termed a _ladle_ which is a kind of cylindrical
spoon, generally made of copper, and fixed to the end of a staff, called
its handle. Upon the powder is put in a wad of rope-yarn, formed like a
ball, which is pressed down upon the powder with the instrument
expressed by fig. 17. called a _rammer_. Upon this wad is put the ball
or shot; and to secure it in its place, another wad is firmly pressed
down upon it, which operation is called _ramming-home_ the wad and shot.
The touch-hole of the piece is then filled with powder, from the
upper-part of which a little train is laid that communicates with it.
The use of this train is to prevent the explosion of the powder from
operating directly upon the instrument employed to fire the piece, which
in that case might be forced out of the hand of the gunner.
In the modern pieces, a little gutter or channel is framed on the upper
part of the breech, to prevent the train from being dispersed by the
wind. This channel reaches from the touch-hole to the base-ring.
The cannon being pointed to its _object_, or the place which it is
intended to strike, the train is fired, and the flame immediately
conveyed to the powder in the touch-hole, by which it is further
communicated to that in the piece. The powder being kindled, immediately
expands so as to occupy a much greater space than when in grains, and
thus dilated it makes an effort on every side to force itself out. The
ball making less resistance than the sides of the piece, upon which the
powder presses at the same time, is driven out by its whole effort, and
acquires that violent motion which is well known to the world.
In plate VII. all the instruments necessary for charging cannon are
exhibited. Besides these already described, there is the spunge, fig.
10. which is used to clean the piece after firing, and to extinguish any
sparks that may remain behind. In the land-service, the handle of the
spunge is nothing else than a long wooden staff; but in ships of war
this handle, that usually contains the rammer at its other end, is a
piece of rope well stiffened by _spun-yarn_, which is for this purpose
firmly wound about it. By this convenience the rammer becomes flexible,
so that the piece is charged within the ship, as the person who loads it
may bend and accommodate the length of the rammer to the distance
between the muzzle and the ship’s side; being at the same time sheltered
from the enemy’s musquetry, to which he would be exposed when using a
wooden rammer without the ship. To spunge a piece therefore is to
introduce this instrument into the bore, and thrusting it home to the
farthest end thereof, to clean the whole cavity. The figures 8 and 9
represent spunges of a different kind; one of which is formed of
sheep-skin, and the other of the strongest bristles of a hog. See the
article EXERCISE.
The _worm_, of which there are also different kinds, fig. 6. and 9. is
used to draw the charge when necessary.
The bit, or priming-iron, is a kind of large needle, whose lower end is
formed into a gimblet, serving to clear the inside of the touch-hole,
and render it fit to receive the prime.
The lint-stock is a kind of staff about three feet long, to the end of
which a match is occasionally fastened to fire the piece.
The fluctuating motion of the sea renders it necessary to secure and
confine the artillery in vessels of war, by several ropes and pullies,
which are called the _gun-tackles_ and _breechings_, without which they
could never be managed in a naval engagement. The breeching has been
already explained, as employed to restrain the recoil. The tackles *
fig. 18, are hooked to ring-bolts in the sides of the carriage, and to
other ring-bolts in the side of the ship, near the edges of the
gun-ports, and are used to draw the piece out into its place after it is
loaded. Besides these, there is another tackle hooked to the rear or
_train_ of the carriage, to prevent the cannon from rolling into its
place till it is charged: this is called the train-tackle, and is
exhibited in fig. 17.
In ships of war, the cannon of the lower-decks are usually drawn into
the ship during the course of an expedition at sea, unless when they are
used in battle. They are secured by lowering the breech so as that the
muzzle shall bear against the upper-edge of the port, after which the
two parts of the breeching are firmly braced together by a rope which
crosses them between the front of the carriage and the port; which
operation is called _frapping_ the breeching. The tackles are then
securely fastened about it with several turns of the rope extended from
the tackle and breeching, over the chace of the cannon, as represented
in fig. 19.
The service of the artillery, or the method of employing it in a naval
action, is explained in the articles ENGAGEMENT and EXERCISE. The manner
of pointing, or directing them to different objects; the effects of
different quantities of powder upon the cannonball; and the different
lines described by its flight, are also treated at large in the article
RANGE.
We shall here subjoin a table of the length and weight of different
cannon, for the information of those who may be entirely unacquainted
therewith; and particularly our sea-gunners.
Length and weight of brass cannon according to the
mensuration in 1753.
Pounders.│ Length. │ Weight.
│ Feet. Inches.│ 100lb. Quarters. lb.
42│ 9 6│ 61 2 10
32│ 9 5│ 55 2 7
24│ 9 5│ 51 1 12
18│ 9 0│ 48 1 0
12│ 9 0│ 29 0 0
9│ 8 5│
6│ 8 0│ 19 0 0
3│ 6 5│ 11 0 0
Length and weight of iron guns used in the sea-service,
according to the mensuration in 1753.
Pounders.│ Length. │ Weight.
│ Feet. Inches.│ 100lb. Quarters. lb.
42│ 10 0│ 55 1 12
32│ 9 6│ 53 3 23
24│ 9 5│ 48 0 0
18│ 9 0│ 41 1 8
12│ 9 0│ 32 3 3
9│ 8 5│ 23 2 2
6│ 7 0│ 17 1 14
4│ 6 0│ 12 2 13
3│ 4 6│ 7 1 7
For an account of the particular number of men appointed to manage the
different degrees of cannon, and the arrangement or distribution of the
cannon according to the several classes of ships, see QUARTERS and RATE.
The following judicious remarks for increasing the strength of the
British navy, by changing the cannon used in ships of war into others of
equal weight but of greater bore, have been selected from the proposal
of the late ingenious Mr. Robins.
The advantage of large cannon over those of a smaller bore is so
generally acknowledged, that a particular discussion of it might perhaps
be spared. * * *
“The most important advantage of heavy bullets is this, that with the
same velocity they break holes out in all solid bodies in a greater
proportion than their weight; that is, for instance, a twenty-four pound
shot will, with the same velocity, break out a hole in any wall,
rampart, or solid beam, in which it lodges, above eight times larger
than will be made by a three pound shot; for its diameter being double,
it will make a superficial fracture above four times as great as the
three-pounder, (more of a smaller hole being closed up by the springing
of the solid body than of a great one) and it will penetrate to more
than twice the depth; by this means the firmest walls of masonry are
easily cut through their whole substance by heavy shot, which could
never be affected by those of a smaller caliber; and in ships the
strongest beams and masts are hereby fractured, which a very great
number of small bullets would scarcely injure.
“To this last advantage of large cannon, which is indeed a capital one,
there must be that of carrying the weight of their bullet in grape or
lead shot, and thereby annoying the enemy more effectually than could be
done by ten times the number of small pieces.
“These are the principal advantages of large cannon, and hence it is no
wonder that those entrusted with the care of the British navy have
always endeavoured to arm all ships with the largest cannon they could
with safety bear; and indeed, within these last hundred years, great
improvements have been made on this head, by reducing the weight of many
of the species of cannon, and thereby enabling the same ships to carry
guns of a larger bore: and, very lately, the six pounders in some of the
smaller ships have been changed for nine pounders of a larger fabric
than usual, which hath been justly esteemed a very great addition, to
the strength of those ships.
“The importance then of allotting to all ships the largest cannon they
can with safety bear being granted, it remains to shew on what
foundation a change is proposed to be made in the fabric of all pieces
from the present eighteen pounders downwards, so that they may be
changed for others of the same, or less weight, but of a larger bore.
This proposition turns on the following considerations.—The species of
cannon proper for each ship is limited by the weight of the pieces; and
when the charge and effort of the bullet are assigned, this weight in
each species is, or ought to be determined by the following
circumstances;
That they shall not be in danger of bursting;
That they shall not recoil too boisterously;
And that they shall not heat too much in frequent firing.
“All this is to be done by a proper quantity of metal properly disposed;
and when the pieces are secured from these accidents, all additional
weight of metal, is not only useless but prejudicial.
“Now what dimensions and weight of metal are more than sufficient for
these purposes, we may learn from the present practice of the navy, in
the fabric of the thirty-two pounders, the heaviest guns in common use;
these are made to weigh (if the author’s information be right) from
fifty-two to fifty-three hundred weight; that is somewhat less than an
hundred and two-thirds for each pound of bullet.
“From this then the author concludes, that any smaller piece, made upon
the model of these thirty-two pounders, and having their weight
proportioned in the same manner to the weight of their bullet, will
fully answer all the purposes recited above, and will be of
unexceptionable service.
“And he founds his opinions on these two principles: first, that the
strength of iron, or of any other metal, is in proportion to its
substance; so that, for instance, where it has one half the substance,
it has one half the strength; and this supposition, he presumes, will be
scarcely contested. Secondly that the force of different quantities of
powder fired in spaces which they respectively fill, is not exactly in
the proportion of those quantities; but the lesser quantity has in
proportion the least force: that is, for instance, the force of one
pound of powder, in like circumstances, is less than one half the force
of two pounds. And this principle the author has deduced from many
repeated and diversified trials of his own; and he believes it will be
found agreeable to all the observations which have been made, or shall
be made, on this subject.
“From these two considerations, he hopes, it will be granted him, that,
if two pieces, a large one and a small one, are made with all their
dimensions in proportion to the diameter of their respective bullets,
and consequently their weights in the same proportion with the weights
of their bullets, then the larger piece, with the same proportion of
powder, will be more strained, will heat more, and recoil more than the
smaller.
“Hence then, as we are assured, that the present thirty-two pounders are
of a sufficient strength and weight for all marine purposes, we have the
greatest reason to suppose, that, if all the pieces of an inferior
caliber were formed upon the same model, measuring by the diameter of
the bullet, these smaller pieces would not be defective, either in
strength or weight, but would be to the full as serviceable on
ship-board, as the present pieces, which are so much overloaded with
metal.
“The author’s scheme then for augmenting the force of the present
sea-batteries, is no more than this plain principle, that all ship-guns
should be cast upon the model of the thirty-two pounders, measuring by
the diameter of the respective bullet; so that for each pound of bullet,
there should be allowed one hundred and two thirds of metal only.
“The advantages of this scheme will appear, by the following comparison
of the weight of the present pieces with their weight proposed by this
new fabric.
Pieces. Weight now in hundreds. Ditto by new fabric.
24 48 to 46 40
18 41 to 39 30
12 34 to 31 20
9 29 to 26 15
6 24 to 18 10
“Hence then it appears, that the twenty-four-pounders will be eased of
six or eight hundred of useless metal; and instead of an inferior
caliber now used, much larger ones of the same weight may be borne,
especially when it is remembered, that this computation exceeds even the
present proportion of the thirty-two-pounders; so that from the above
projected eighteen pounders, for instance, two or three hundred weight
may be safely taken.”
The changes then proposed by the author are these:
│Pounders. Hundreds. Pounders. Hundreds.
For│ 6 of 24 and 18 new 12 of 20
│ 9 29 and 26 18 of 28
│ 12 34 and 31 18 of 28
│ 18 41 and 39 24 of 40
“The nine pounders lately cast, being, as the author is informed, still
lighter than what is here represented, they may perhaps be only
transformed into twelve pounders; but this will be a very great addition
of strength, and the twelve-pounders thus borne will be considerably
lighter than the smallest nine-pounders now in use. The weight of the
present three-pounders are not remembered exactly by the author; but he
doubts not, but they are heavier than the proposed six-pounders, and may
therefore be changed for them.
“That many objections will be made to the present proposal is not to be
questioned; but, as they will equally hold against the use of the
present thirty-two-pounders, which are known to be guns of
unexceptionable service, that alone, it is conceived, will be an answer.
“If it be supposed (as ancient practice is always favourably heard) that
the excesses in the proportionate weight of the small pieces must have
been originally founded on some approved principle, or otherwise they
could not have been brought into use, it may be answered, that a hundred
years since there were four-pounders made use of, which were heavier
than some of the present nine-pounders, and had the same prescription to
plead in their behalf.—Perhaps the origin of this excess in the smaller
pieces may be accounted for by supposing, that when guns are used in
batteries on shore, their length cannot be in proportion to the diameter
of their bore; because the parapet being of a considerable thickness, a
short piece would, by its blast, ruin the embrasures; and the smaller
pieces being for this reason made nearly of the same length with the
larger, did hence receive their additional weight of metal. But this
reason holds not at sea, where there is no other exception to the
shortness of a piece, but the loss of force, which, in the instances
here proposed, is altogether inconsiderable; for the old
twelve-pounders, for example, being in length from nine feet to nine
feet, and a half, the new ones here proposed will be from seven feet to
seven and a half long. The difference in the force of the bullet, fired
from these different pieces, is but little; and it will hereafter
appear, that in the present subject much greater differences than these
are of no consequence.
“If it should be said, that the new fabric here proposed must have the
present allowance of powder (which in the smaller pieces is half the
weight of the ball) diminished, and that it must be reduced to the rate
of the thirty-two-pounders, which is only seven-sixteenths of the weight
of the ball; it is answered, that if the powder in all ship-cannon
whatever, was still farther reduced to one-third of the weight of the
ball, or even less, it would be a considerable advantage, not only by
the saving of ammunition, but by keeping the guns cooler and more quiet,
and at the same time more effectually injuring the ships of the
enemy[3]; for with the present allowance of powder the guns are heated,
and their tackles and furniture strained, and this only to render the
bullet less efficacious than it would prove if impelled by a smaller
charge. Indeed in battering of walls, which are not to be penetrated by
a single shot from any piece whatever, the velocity of the bullet, how
much soever augmented, still produces a proportionate effect, by
augmenting the depth to which it penetrates: but the sides of the
strongest ships, and the greater part of her timbers, are of a limited
thickness, insufficient to stop the generality of cannon bullets, fired
at a reasonable distance, even with a less charge than is here proposed.
And it is a matter of experiment, that a bullet, which can but just pass
through a piece of timber, and loses almost all its motion thereby, has
a much better chance of rending and fracturing it, than if it passed
through it with a much greater velocity.
“That a much better judgment may be made of the reasonableness of this
speculation, the author thinks proper to add (and he believes future
experience will not contradict him) that a twelve-pounder, as here
proposed, which is one of the smallest pieces at present under
consideration, when charged with one-third of the weight of the bullet
in powder, will penetrate a beam of the best seasoned toughest oak, to
more than twenty inches depth; and if, instead of one solid beam, there
are a number of small ones, or of planks laid together; then allowing
for rending and tearing, frequent in such cases, he doubts not, but it
will often go through near double that thickness, and this any where
within a hundred yards distance: that is, any where within that
distance, which the most experienced officers have recommended for naval
engagements. In the same distance, a bullet from the twelve-pounders now
in use, charged with half the weight of powder, will penetrate about
one-third part deeper: but if the efforts of each piece are compared
together at five hundred yards distance, the differences of their forces
will not be considerable. If this be so, it will not be asserted, I
imagine, that the twelve-pounder here proposed is less useful, or less
efficacious, for all naval purposes, than the weightier twelve-pounder
hitherto made use of.
“The author has in this proposal fixed on the thirty-two pounders, as
the standard for the rest; because experience has long authorised them.
But from the trials he has made, he is well satisfied, a much greater
reduction of weight, than is here proposed, might safely take place; and
that one fourth, or even one fifth of the weight of the bullet in
powder, if properly disposed, is abundantly sufficient for every species
of ship-guns[4]. However, the author is far from desiring, that his
speculations should be relied on in an affair of this nature, where he
pretends not to have tried the very matter he proposes, but founds his
opinion on certain general principles and collateral experiments, which
he conceives, he may apply to the present case without error. He would
himself recommend an experimental examination of this proposal, as the
only one to which credit ought to be given. What he intends by the
present paper, is to represent it as a matter worthy of consideration,
and really such as it appeared to him: if those to whose censure he
submits it, are of the same opinion, there is an obvious method of
determining how far his allegations are conclusive; and that is by
directing one of these pieces to be cast, a twelve-pounder for instance,
and letting it be proved with the same proportion of powder allotted for
the proof of the thirty-two-pounders: Then if this piece be fired a
number of times successively on a carriage, and its recoil, and degree
of heat be attended to, and if the penetration of its bullet into a
thick butt of oak-beams or plank be likewise examined, a judgment may
thence be formed, of what may be expected from the piece in real
service; and the result of these trials will be the most incontestable
confutation or confirmation of this proposal.”
CANNONADE, as a term of the marine, may be defined the application of
artillery to the purposes of naval war, or the direction of its efforts
against some distant object intended to be seized or destroyed, as a
ship, battery, or fortress.
Cannonading is therefore used in a vessel of war to take, sink, or burn
the enemy’s ships, or to drive them from their defences ashore, and to
batter and ruin their fortifications.
Since a large man of war may be considered as a combination of floating
batteries, it is evident that the efforts of her artillery must in
general be greatly superior to those of a fortress on the sea-coast: I
say in general, because on some particular occasions her situation may
be extremely dangerous, and her cannonading ineffectual. Her superiority
consists in several circumstances, as, the power of bringing her
different batteries to converge to one point; of shifting the line of
her attack so as to do the greatest possible execution against the
enemy; or to lie where she will be the least exposed to his shot: and
chiefly because, by employing a much greater number of cannon against a
fort than it can possibly return, the impression of her artillery
against stone-walls soon, becomes decisive and irresistible. Besides
these advantages in the attack, she is also greatly superior in point of
defence: because the cannon shot passing with rapidity through her
sides, seldom do any execution out of the line of their flight, or
occasion much mischief by their splinters: whereas they very soon
shatter and destroy the faces of a parapet, and produce incredible havoc
amongst the men, by the fragments of the stones, &c. A ship may also
retreat when she finds it too dangerous to remain longer exposed to the
enemy’s fire, or when her own fire cannot produce the desired effect.
Finally, the fluctuating situation of a ship, and of the element on
which she rests, renders the efforts of bombs very uncertain, and
altogether destroys the effect of the _ricochet_, or rolling and
bounding shot, whose execution is so pernicious and destructive in a
fortress or land-engagement; both of which, however, a ship may apply
with great success. See RANGE.
The chief inconveniency to which a ship is exposed, on the contrary, is,
that the low-laid cannon in a fort near the brink of the sea, may strike
her repeatedly, on or under the surface of the water, so as to sink her
before her cannonade can have any considerable efficacy.
CANOE, a sort of Indian boat or vessel, formed of the trunk of a tree
hollowed, and sometimes of several pieces of the bark fastened together.