The Sun.
London, England, 1866-07-13 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMM—The only decision of much importance
that has been taken by Lord Derby's Government
is one which, happily, involves no party considera-
tions whatever. General Peel has already made
arrangements that 60,000 Enfield rifles should be
converted into breech-loaders, in addition to the
40,000 for which orders had been given by Lord
Hartington. He has, moreover, issued a notice in-
viting private manufacturers to send in tenders for
the conversion of muzzle-loading into breech-load-
ing small arms, so that we shall not be entirely
dependent on the resources of the Royal Factory
at Enfield. Waiving for the present the question
whether it is better, on the whole, to attach
breech-pieces to the barrels of our Enfield rifles,
or to imitate the example of the French
Emperor, by adopting an entirely new weapon,
we readily acknowledge the promptitude shown by
the Conservative Secretary of State for War in
profiting by the experience which Austria has
bought so dear. In his late speech to the electors
of Huntingdon General Peel took some pains, which
might, perhaps, have been spared, to rebut the
charge of being an ultra-Tory and the greatest anti-
Reformer in Lord Derby's Cabinet. He cannot do
so more effectually than by effecting with his own
department reforms on which the honour and even
the safety of our army may depend. It is much to
his credit that he attributes to his predecessor the
whole merit of adopting the new principle and
making the necessary experiments, only claiming
for himself that of acting upon the lesson taught by
recent events. The success of the Prussian needle gun
proves, as General Peel truly says, that almost any
breech-loader is so far superior in action to any
muzzle-loader that no time must be lost in arming
our troops with the former weapon. Lord Harting-
ton would, doubtless, have come to the same con-
clusion, had he continued in office, and nothing re-
mains but the practical application of it. A letter
which appea'ed in our columns on Wednesday,
'signed by Captain Walker, of the 79th Highlan-
ders, points out several considerable objections
to conversion. The writer urges that a con-
verted rifle is but a makeshift at best, and that
in particular the " Snider" method of conversion
was rejected, apon investigation, by the American
Government. He says, moreover, that an Enfield
rifle will not last more than ten years, and there-
fore, unless almost new, would not repay the cost of
conversion. Finally, he contends that by retaining
the Enfield bore we sacrifice one of the main objects
of the breech-loading system—" viz., that a very
small bore may be used, with its concomitant advan-
tages of increased range, penetration, and accuracy,
without any of the disadvantages which the use of a
smaller calibre than -50 in. involves in a muzzle-
loader, in the shape of difficulty in loading and ac-
cumulation of fouling, &c." He might, perhaps,
have added that a certain risk of weakening the
barrel at a critical point is incurred by any process
of conversion, and that a liability to burst, however
remote, is the very worst defect which a rifle can have.
On the other hand, we have Gen. Peel's assurance that
repeated trials have proved "the fire of the converted
guns to be much more effective than it was before
the change was made," and that, in opinion,
they will be far superior to the famous needle-gun.
This is, simply, a question of fact, and kis one that
admits of being settled by decisive tests. There can
be no difficulty in procuring a sufficient number of
needle-guns, and matching them not only with our
own converted Enfields, but with other breech-
loading rifles of the most approved patterns. Capt.
Walker justly complains that range and precision
of fire are qualities which have hitherto been too
exclusively favoured. Facility of loading and con-
sequent rapidity of discharge are now known, and
might have been known before, to be of still greater
importance; but one point has not even yet received
the attention it deserves. These competitions are
generally conducted by skilled marksmen, and for
the purpose of measuring accuracy in shooting the
best shots and the most favourable conditions must,
of course, be secured. But for the purpose of as-
certaining the comparative efficiency of two
weapons in actual warfare, they should be placed
in the hands of untrained men. It is quite pos-
sible that a rifle of complicated construction, with
which the maker could make wonderful practice,
might be less serviceable than a clumsier one for
the use of common soldiers. Suppose, for instance,
the superior arm, being much smaller in the bore,
required more frequent cleaning, or became more
quickly heated, this of itself might make all the dif-
ference, and entitle the inferior weapon to prefer-
ence. We must, indeed, bewareof exaggerating such
difficulties as these, lest we fall into the same error
as those who upheld the efficiency of Brown Bess
against that of therifle. Still they cannot beignored
and they have an immediate bearing on Captain
Walker's proposal to introduce a smallbore breech-
loader capable of being discharged eight or ten times
in a minute, carrying " a well-proportioned bullet,
with a trajectory so low that judging distance would
become almost superfluous." By all means let a rifle
of this kind, such as that invented by Mr. Westley
Richards and described by Capt. Walker, be sub-
mitted to the inspection of the War-office authorities,
and of the volunteer committee now engaged in an
independent inquiry into the same subject. Let due
weight, too, be given to the reported selection of a
model breech-loader, after a comparison of more
than 100 designs, by the French Government. Let
the relative expense of converting Enfield rifles and
turning out new ones be treated as a matter of se-
condary consequence, though it cannot be left en-
tirely out of account. Only let it be remembered
that a military rifle is intended solely for service in
the field. The best is that which, handled by men of
ordinary skill and intelligence, does most execution in battle, whether itbemore or less perfect in theory
and whether or not it be the one that an amateur
would choose for shooting at a target. The most
valuable suggestion contained in Captain Walker's
letter remains to be noticed, and before any final
step is taken we earnestly commend it to the consi-
deration of Gen. Peel. No breech-loader is worth
adopting, or even examining, which requires to be
capped before each discharge. " Fixed ammuni-
tion," or, as Captain Walker calls it, " a suitable
cartridge containing its own ignition," is an in-
dispensable accompaniment of the breech-loading
system. Next to ramming down, the move-
ments required for capping involve the greatest
waste of time and trouble, besides unsteadying the
hand, and few sportsmen would care to use a breech-
' loader on such terms. This is not a matter of de-
tail, but one which vitally concerns the efficiency of
the weapon. Unless the " Snider principle" can be
so modified as to admit of self-igniting cartridges,
we do not hesitate to deprecate its introduction.
Some five years ago, we believe, Lord Herbert made
a minute in favour of retaining the cartridges now
in use, on the ground that we have no magazines
properly constructed for the storage of cartridges
containing their own ignition, but it would be absurd
for any Secretary for War, enlightened by subse-
quent experience, to shelter himself under the au-
thority of his predecessor. General Peel is bound,
as a responsible Minister, to reconsider the whole
question for himself, and, as a military man, he
ought to be more competent than Lord Herbert to
judge of it. If our Enfield rifles are to be converted
at all, they should be converted on the very best
plan ; and when this has been determined, the claims
of repeating rifles to supersede all other breech-
, loaders in future will demand an impartial hearing.

POST.—We have, as Lord Stanley says, a hasty
and positive way of judging our neighbours' affairs.
It is a bad habit in itself, and its tendency is to
cause a good deal of unpleasantness. Still this sit-
ting in judgment upon actions andmotives is claimed
as a-sort of vested right. More than once, at no re-
mote period, we have ourselves been called to ac-
count merely for expressing the opinion which Lord
Stanley has just enunciated. There are people who
argue from suspicions to a foregone conclusion, and
pursue the process as complacently as if they really
believed it was based upon ascertained facts. Lord
Stanley made the remark in reference to past events,
but, considering what is now daily occurring, it was
not inopportune. We judged our neighbours across
the Channel before we began judging those whose
home is on the other side of the Atlantic, and, having
ceased to suspect the Americans, we persevere in
suspecting the French. Only yesterday, and upon
no better foundation than a perfectly intelligible
statement published in an Austrian evening journal,
the suggestion that France contemplated " armed
mediation" in the German question was seriously
discussed. The day before, too, the idea of main-
taining the balance of power by territorial compen-
sation was dismissed with the well-known line of a
popular and patriotic German war-song, and the
Emperor Napoleon was advised to study " La
logique des faits." Now, there may be no harm in
this, but it is impossible not to agree with Lord Stan-
ley that some unpleasantness of feeling is its natural
consequence. Moreover, whatever Europe may
think of the-policy of the. Emperor, we at any rate
have no reason to complain of it. To England, as
Lord Stanley said, he has always been a faithful
ally, and we have never had to reproach him with
one hostile word or one unfriendly act. If, then, we
must judge our neighbours, there are conditions
which in justice and generosity should he observed.
We may think that the famous old cry " Sie sollen
es nicht haben" hardly fits in the mouth of those
who have robbed Denmark and are invading
Bohemia ; but, be that as it may, it is no part of
our duty to join in the chorus. When, if ever, the
words rush again into the meaning they were origi-
nally intended to convey we shall be able to appre-
ciate their import, and meanwhile it must be re-
marked that he who accepts the office of peacemaker
is not to be envied. Before this war commenced

the French Emperor was held responsible for not
preventing it. He had but to inform Prussia and
Italy that their conduct did not approve itself to
his sense of right ; nothing more was necessary.
The, Prussians and Italians would not dream of
doing anything that might give trouble or offence
to the Emperor ; they were so tractable and docile
that there could be no difficulty in binding them to
keep the peace. This, and a great deal more to the
same effect, was repeated from day to day. Now,
however, it is quite another story. If anybody
touches Prussia they will have to do with the Ger-
many of 1813. From the Rhine to the Vistula the
great German nation will rise up in its might, and
stand firm and formidable upon the ancient lines of
the Fatherland. The Power that might have been
awed into submission would at present resent inter-
ference. Prussia, having proved her strength at
Sadowa, may dictate the terms on which she is dis-
posed to make peace. And this is, no doubt, true
to a certain extent; still that which is manifest to
all the world to-day was one of the contingencies
which statesmen had to reckon with a month ago.
It is easy to speculate after the event, but there is
nothing to warrant the assumption that Austria
would have yielded any of her German rights in 3
Conference. As lord Stanley put it, the problem
in cases of this kind is how, without taking action
in the quarrel, to mediate effectively. Practically
" armed mediation," properly so-called, is barely
possible, inasmuch as one of the belligerents would
take advantage of it ; and mediation in anticipa-
tion of war—that is, mediation which is positive
and to be enforced—must also in the result come to
the same end. That, therefore, which was pressed
upon France in the first instance, might have
brought about the very " armed mediation" which
is actually deprecated. At the least, this is exceed-
ingly unfair. It is not judging our neighbours as
we would wish to be ourselves judged. Neither in
word nor in deed is there, so far as we know, anY
justification for the supposition that France is
shaping her course without regard to public inte-
rests. She is as entitled to pay primary attention
to her own interests as we are, and as all countries
are ; but as to the acquirement of territory, if that
had been the object of the French Government,
there was a nearer road to its attainment. Prussia
and Italy will eventually, it may be assumed, rectify
their frontiers, and, as a matter of right, they have
no claim whatever upon the provinces to be annexed'
They have not as yet even the title which success
in war gives. But the legitimate answer to misgiv-
ings with respect to territorial arrangements is that,
be they what they may, to all and each Of them the
great Powers of Europe must be consenting parties.
It is not as if France had, as was equivocally re-
commended, taken it upon herself to restrain the
three belligerent Powers, which, if successful, would
have amounted to arbitration, and if unsuccasfal
to an extension of the war. Lord Clarendon, it
will be recollected, expressly guarded Englano,
against being committed to 'that policy, and Lora
Clarendon has been rigntly commended for his dis-
cretion. It is a step that, if taken at all, should be
taken ilia form to constrain immediate acquiescence;
it is, in fact, a measure of coercion, and must be
considered in that light. The theory may be ex-
cellent, but it is apparently difficult to realise its in.:
tention. Why, remains to be discovered ; but it 1°
not through selfishness, for, as Lord Stanley re.:
marked, " mere selfishness does not pay;" nor is"
because " the pomp and circumstance of glorious
war" have lost their power over the nations. Oil/
by searching the hearts of Governments can the
reason be accurately assigned. It is enough, how:
ever, to know that, be it what it may, there is 11f,
alternative between periodical contention—conflicts
like that which ten days ago raged over the broad
field of Sadowa—and the confidence and -good tin'
derstanding that is frequently, if imperceptibly, ice"
peded in the way Lord Stanley indicated.

COUNTRY MARKETS.