The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-06 00:00:00

FRAN CE.

BOURSE, November s.—The English funds arriv-
ing with a fall of per cent. has added to the
downward movement which took place in this
market towards the close of business yesterday, and
Threes, for the Account, which opened at 70f. 85c.,
speedily receded, and are now at 70f. 65c. There
has been little doing in Railway Shares, and
some of the lines are rather lower. Mobilier has
well maintained yesterday's quotation. The mar-
ket closed as follows :

4t per Cents. 9B
Do. end month
3 per Cents
Do. end month 7O 65
New 3 per Cents
Do. end month —
Credit Mobilier..., 1175
Do. end month 1180 -
RA IL'

Bank Shares 3255
Credit F oncier 1250
Piedmontese Fives 72 60
Italian Loan 72 90
Rom4n - .
Austrian

Spanish Threes 52
Home Debt
PAYS.

Cash. Account.
Orleans lO4O .. 1048 75
Northern
New ditto
Lyons and Mediterranean 1173 75 .. 1181 25
Geneva 352 50 ..
Southern - .. 860
Western
Eastern .. • ,.. 556 25 555
Sardinian 375 .. 380
Austrian
Lombard
North of Spain
Saragossa.
Ditto to Barcelona 358 75 .. 357 50

7HE A.RMS7RONG AND WHI7WOR7.H
CO Pi T.ROVE.RSY.

Sir William Armstrong, in a letter to a contem-
porary, says :

Sir,—l observe in your paper of yesterday an extract from
the Army and Navy Gazette purporting to give the results
of some firing with Whitworth and Armstrong field guns.
I must once more be permitted to caution your readers
against attributing importance to any but official accounts
of such trials. I have neither time nor inclination to fol-
low my anonymous literary assailants round the circle of
the daily and weekly press, er to contradict or correct the
various pieces of intelligence that appear with significant
persistence about my guns. My position exposes me to
attack, and one-sided statistics seem to be a favourite wea-
pon with the friends of some inventions. Usually lam
compelled from press of business to leave them unanswered.
1 can only trust that, my silence in such cases will be im-
puted to the right cause.
First, as to the report copied into your columns from the
Army and Navy Gazette. The narrative need not be read
through twice to see in whose interest its original was
framed. It is obvious that before taking for granted the
literal accuracy of any account of a contest between Whit •
worth and Armstrong guns the public ought to know from
what quarter the account comes. I confess that the article
in question appears to me very much like a bulletin issued
after an American battle. It represents, not so much what
is fairly to be said upon the subject as what can be said
upon the subject by the friends of Mr. 'Whitworth.
There are at Shorncliffe at present both Whitworth and
Armstrong field guns, and it would seem that on a recent
occasion some of them have been fired side by side in the
presence of Mr. Whitworth, Colonel Boxer, and their
friends. That is all I know of " the first open compari-
son between Whitworth and Armstrong guns." I was
neither a witness of, nor privy to, the experiment, nor have
I have received any official report of it, but I can see
enough to be able to show the point of view from which the
account of it has been written. The correspondent of the
Army and Navy Gazette tells us that the guns were fired
at " a floating target," and that, though " no very accurate
comparison could be made as to the respective hits"—
which is perhaps an ingenious way of dismissing a difficulty
—" the Whitworth was the first to shoot away the flag
aimed et." The value of this information entirely depends on
the number of guns employed on either side, and, as it ap-
pears from the Armyand Navy Gazette that Mr. Whitworth
had four guns to my two, he naturally had twice as good a
chance of hitting the flag first. If the Whithworth guns
did fire with more accuracy than mine on this occasion, I can
only say that the result is at variance with previous experi-
ments. But, at all events, it is obvious that such a trial as
is described must be perfectly valueless for purposes of true
comparison. For instance, it is impossible to determine the
relative accuracy of guns by firing them over water, which
does not admit of the deviation of the shot being in each
case ascertained and recorded. Neither is it the practice to
judge of the comparative merits of shells without proper
targets to exhibit their relative destructive effects. As to
the rapidity of firing, I can say little further than that my
guns seem to fire much slower in the columns of some of
the newspapers than they do anywhere else. It may pos-
sibly be the fact that on this occasion they took 151 minutes
to fire 20 rounds. All I can say is that all official report of
the previous rapid firing of Armstrong guns will show that
this rate has been far exceeded.

By this time, sir, your readers will, if they are wise, have
learnt by experience to regard as one-sided some at least of
the unaccredited accounts of what is said to happen to my
gun behind my back ; indeed, it is high time that a proper
and systematic comparison should be made between Mr.
W hitworth's gun and mine, and that the public should no
longer be swayed about by inaccurate statements and by
desultory and uncertain trials, which leave such ample
room for partisans on either side to put their own construc-
tions on the results obtained. It is now nearly three years
since I first invited such a comparison. A reference to the
proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers will show
that in February, 1860, I publicly proposed that a" friendly
contest" should take place between Mr. Whitworth and my-
self, and Mr. Whitworth, who was present, consented. The
War-office approved this proposition, and, under their in-
structions, the Ordnance Select Committee forwarded to me
a programme for a comparative trial to which I at once
assented. The programme was afterwards returned to me
in a form altered, as I understood, to meet Mr. Whitworth's
wishes, and I a second time agreed to it. Subsequently, on
more than one occasion, I urged the War-office, by letter
and otherwise, to have the trials commenced, but, after a
long delay, I was at length officially informed, without any
reason being assigned, that the contest would
not take
place. I, at all events, am clear of all obstructiveness in
this matter, and it is for Mr. Whitworth to show whether
he is equally irresponsible for this failure in our common
project. Without further reference, however, to the past,
I now repeat my desire for a formal comparative trial
before any official tribunal between the two systems. lam
ready to match my bi each-loader against his breech-loader,
my muzzle-loader against his muzzle-loader, and my pro-
jectiles and fuses against his projectiles and fuses. Mr.
Whitworth has of late added to his reputation by exhibit..
ing the powers of his gun when steel projectiles are used.
I will also exhibit the powers of mine when projectiles of
the same costly material are employed.
I still hope that our contest may be of an amicable nature,
although my friendly dispositions have been of late rather
severely tested. Mr. Whitworth in his recent letter to
you gratuitously disclaims all obligation to me in refer-
ence to the mode of construction of the gun with which
his late successes have been achieved, although that
gun was made in the factory of which I am superin-
tendent, and on the system and by the process which" I
have introduced and established. More than this—he dis-
parages the system of construction of which he has success-
fully availed himself, and all this, without my having
uttered a word upon the subject, or laid claim to any part
in his success. Mr. Whitworth is quite welcome to use the
fruit of my labour, but I think he should abstain from un.
dervaluing the bridge that carries him over the stream. We
are both working, I hope, for the public good, and in this
spirit I told him three years ago, on the occasion to which
I have already referred, and in view of the contest which I
then proposed, that he " was at liberty to adapt to his guns
if he pleased my shells and fuses." In contrast with this
offer I have within the last few days been served with a
legal notice prohibiting me, under the powers of a patent ob-
tained by Mr. Whitworth, from using flat-headed projec-
tiles. At present it is only for experimental purposes that
flat-headed shot could be required, and no commercial in-
terests are yet at stake. I can, therefore, see no other ob
in -
ject this prohibition than that of putting a stop to expe-
riments for ascertaining whether the Armstrong guns, of
which the country are already in possession, would become
more or less effective if used with shot of this form. If Mr.
Whitworth wishes to monopolise flat heads for his shot,
and can maintain his patent, by all means let him do so.
I shall content myself with trying my Roundheads against
his Flatheads, and believe, before long, that it will be seen
that the one shape is as good as the other when the same
material is used for both.

-----
Importing Tea without colour on the leaf pre-
vents the Chinese passing off inferior leaves as in the
usual kinds. Horniman's Tea is uncoloured, therefore,
ay op god alike. Sold in packets by 2,280 Agents,