The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-30 00:00:00

THE ARMSTRONG GUNS.

A very important parliamentary paper has been
issued respecting the arrangements between the
Government and Sir William Armstrong for the in-
troduction of his artillery into the naval and mili-

tary cervices. The select committee appointed to
inquire into the expenditure incurred since the be-
ginning of 1858 on improved ordnance, whether
obtained by contract or manufactured in the Go-
vernment founderies, have presented a report dated
July 23, 1883. They state that the Armstrong gun
was first brought to the notice of the Government in
December, 1854, when the Duke of Newcastle (then
Secretary of State for War) gave Sir W. Armstrong
(then Mr. Armstrong) an order for a number of his
guns, not exceeding six, for trial. A three-pounder
was delivered in July, 1855, when Mr. Armstrong
forwarded a detailed report of the experiments he

had made. The subject was referred to the Ord

nance select committee, whose report, though quali-
fied, was in the main favourable to the gun, and

who desired to make further experiments. The gun
was re-bored up to a 5-pounder, and in December,
1856, was tried in the presence of Col, Eatdley
Wilmot (superintendent, Royal Gun Factory), near

Newcastle, who reported, Dec. 30, 1856, that at
1,500 and 2,000 yards the gun had made remarkably
good practice. In January, 1857, a second gun was
ordered, to correspond as nearly as possible with the
service 9-pounder field gun. Experiments were
made with an 18-pounder in competition with a
service 32-pounder gun. The result was so satisfac-
tory that Lord Panmure said—" I am clearly of
opinion that this is a most valuable contribution to
our army. For all purposes of projection and accu-
racy of flight of the projectiles, the experiments are
conclusive. Further experiments should be made."

In 1858 the attention of General Peel, Secretary of
State for War, was directed to the circumstance that
we were behind other countries in not having any
rifled ordnance for field service. He accordingly

called upon Col. Lefroy, his scientific adviser, for a
report on all the experiments that had been tried on
rifled ordnance; and, in accordance with the recom-
mendation of that report, appointed a special com-
mittee to advise him as to the best rifled gun for
field service. This special committee came to the
conclusion that it was not expedient to incur the
expense of trying further experiments with any ex-
cept those of Messrs. Whitworth and Armstrong.

The experiments with the Whitworth gun were no
of as extended a character as those with the Arm
strong. At that time Mr. Whitworth had not any
gun of his own construction, nor did he propose any
system of constructing guns. The committee ap-
pointed to investigate the question recommended the
Armstrong as the field gun of the service. A gua-
rantee was given to Sir W. Armstrong that he should
not be a loser by the expenditure of £12,000 on a
plant sufficient to enable him to turn out 100 guns a
year. This guarantee was afterimsywn,eosLakpaororloodar,.s inlcnreatsheed ;wbiuntter
Lord Derby, in a letter addressed to General Peel
on the 18th of December, 1858, said that he should
rather doubt
maisltulyitpohbpineno:
yteahmxaopadfsenuadwugi
lhfegaaneerencsgt expediency—in —rd
number
i—uunmbot
doubtless,
improvements
sr
apresentftipressinggm guns,
en and
sai,fnnoofdrafpnttr infancy
ofimmediate
ex-
perience
eeed
cii noa
economy
weoe
fichrsietfityy,pief andnot
eaxteltuhseivehliyg,hteostthraattec.lasHs
ofe sug-
gestedgalusnos,say32.
pou that32-pounders,
de
r s , theof whichfirst worders v shouldhave
h a d
sufficient
ifibeei e
n t confined
proof,
and that we should defer any order for heavier guns
till they had been rather more tested. On the 15th
of January, 1859, Sir W. Armstrong assigned his
interest in all patents for, and improvements in, the
manufacture of ordnance to the Government. In
order to obtain as soon as possible a supply of Arm-
strong guns, it was decided to enter into arrange-
ments with a company set up at Elswick.for the
manufacture of Armstrong guns and projectiles. A
guarantee was given to this company to secure them
against loss by the erection of buildings and machi-
nery, The Government undertook to keep them in
full work, but kept in its own hands the power of
com-
pensation. The necessities of the service requiring
terminating the engagement on the paymgoweunaitrnoagnfttoeethe
a larger number of Armstrong guns to be provided
than were at first anticipated, the guarantee given
by Lord Derby's Government was
do iDnceriGeBarssee,yodo,ostfiahrtsaetss
to £50,000 and then to £60,000. After Gen. Peel
and stores has
ilaefctreoaffisecde
pLroaradaaHreerfborergt,anina,Oractia.,edlBtstnh9ed,
its final amount of £85,000. This agreement was
the amount paid
beentbahse aeatterminated
compensationvrpaeacliuedeiv
teoiadnf .
toAhvpTee rrhai
cli
bias oomlwfu9pto, thisaounoxl
company.
of 1858-59, the Board of Admiralty, acting upon
the advice of Capt. Hewlett,
cided upon the introduction of the
ship ship Excellent, gunnery ship
into the navy for boat service;
R.Na.
n,
Portsmouth,
ofrirnmht esstmrthrelkoouinsetugjhme,gen
itudynee'rsa.
of 1859, the same officer having urged the im-
portance of introducing into the navy larger
calibres of Armstrong guns, the Board of Ad-
miralty requested the Secretary of State for War,
in the strongest manner, to supply them, with as
little delay as
possible, with a large number of
40-pounder and 70-pounder Armstrong guns. At
the same time careful and extensive experiments
were carried on to test whether any safe system of
strengthening cast-iron guns could be found, or
whether any better, speedier, or cheaper system
constructing rifled guns existed than that proposed
prws yehdtof the
pattern of the Armstrong 40-pounder for naval by W. Armstrong. None such having been found
within the period for inquiry, the Armstrong sp.
adopted by the Government.
tern was completely
si Sir
WilliamOn
Armstrong 24,
glBwsa9a,
a
a committee,
meaiber,ov
ap of eh
ser-
vice. The system was first extended to the 110
calibre on the 14th October, 1859. The political
necessities of the day appear to have been so urgent
as not to allow time for maturing the design pre-
vious to its manufacture. In consequence of the
pressure which existed at that time the first 100 of