MEMOIR OF DAXIEL TREAD WELL. 411 



viz. first and second rounds, three pounds of powder, two shot, and two wads, and 

 three rounds with two pounds of powder, one shot, and two wads ; and third round, 

 two pounds of powder, one shot, and two wads." We shall now see the tests to 

 which the Treadwell guns were actually suhjected, and that the results showed 

 them to be far stronger than the Finspong guns with which they were to be 

 compared. 



To Daniel Treadwell, Esq., CamhriJije, Mass. 



Ordnance Office, Washington, 27 March, 1844. 

 Sir, — Enclosed herewith are two reports of the trial of guns No. 3 and 4, just received 

 from Captain Huger. You will perceive that the flaws or imperfect welds gradually enlarge, 

 but there appears to be no such thing as wearing out or enlarging the bores, and even the vents 

 do not increase much in size with fifteen hundred discbarges. I am in doubt whether to press 

 the trials any furtlier at this time. It seems to be almost a waste of ammunition. Let me hear 

 your views on the subject. 



I am sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, 



G. Talcott, Lt. Col. Ordnance. 



To Coloxel George Talcott. 



Cambridge, April 1, 1844, 



Dear Sir, — I have received yours of March 27, with the reports of Captain Huger. You do 

 not appear to have made up your mind upon the reports, but to me the facts shown by them are 

 as favorable as I could have expected, — indeed, more so, as I had entertained some apprehension 

 from what I have lately learned in making the large guns for the Navj% and as shown in a 

 former letter to you, that many of the welds of these guns would open, as the method of making 

 them was very defective compared with that now followed. By these reports, it seems to have 

 done so, to a very slight extent, in a few places. 



By the report on gun Xo. 3, you will see that the only defect, eight inches from the muzzle, 

 was noticed before firing, and after the 1,218 fires Captain Huger says : " The edges of the 

 defect had become somewhat worn, and tlie flaw a little larger. No other defects observed in the 

 bore." It was therefore in about the same state that it was before firing. 



With No. 4 there were on the interior of the bore two small cavities, one at 41.6 in., the 

 other at 43 in. from the muzzle. These appeared sliglitly to increase up to 1,218 fires, when two 

 other cavities were discovered, one 47 in. and one 13 in. from the muzzle. After 1,500 rounds, 

 he says, " the larger flaws above noticed did not appear much increased," and the measurement 

 gives them from .1 to .3 in. long, and .1 in. deep. Very possibly the little openings may be further 

 enlarged by another 1,000 rounds. But it may take many thousand rounds to render the guns 

 unserviceable, and when that shall happen, no barm can come to those about them. It seems 

 to mc, thei-efore, especially if we take into view the fully proved durability against wearing, that 

 no more ought to have been expected from these first guns manufactured in this method. Indeed, 

 all that can be saitl against them is tiiat they are not perfect, and what thing was the first time 

 ever made so ? what, indeed is ever made so ? Compare these with bronze guns. The proof 

 charges borne by these would have alone ruined bronze. Compare them with cast iron. Wlio 

 would willingly stand by a cast-iron gun after 1,000 rounds ? and who would fear to stand by 



