MEMOIR OF DANIEL TREADWELL. 415 



To Daniel Treadwell, Esq. 



Ordnance Office, Washington, 26 December, 1844. 

 My dear Sir, — Your letter of 5th instant was duly received, and to-day also yours of 20tli. 

 The endurance of the 32-poiuider Navy gun is wonderful, yet not astonishing to me. I called on 

 Commodore Crane this morning, and left him the details. He had only a general statement from 

 Commander Wadsworth, expressed his surprise, but thought no method could be devised for 

 preventing the great recoil, and seemed to infer that the guns could never be used on shipboard. 

 So you see the next thing is to banish his doubts on that point. I need not tell you that, the 

 difficulty fairly overcome, I can see nothing to prevent the adoption of the guns for service on 

 land and sea. 



Respectfully and truly your obedient servant, 



G. Talcott. 



Mr. Treaclwc41, in his " Short Account of an Improved Cannon," says : — 



" I have not liitlierto spoken of carrying this method of nialciug cannon to those of enormous 

 sizes, such, for exam})le, as shall throw shot of a thousand pounds, perhaps of many tons in weight. 

 I can see no insuperable pi'actical difficulty, however, to making such guns, by the method devised 

 by me. On the contrary, I can have but little doubt that further practice will lead to the fabri- 

 cation of guns of these great calibres with perfect facility. The efficiency of ordnance of this 

 kind, especially for the defence of harbors, must be apparent at a glance.* 



" On a full consideration, tlien, of all the facts herein related, it seems perfectly fair to con- 

 clude that cannon may be made, in the method here indicated, which shall combine in half the 

 weight of cast-iron guns, of like calibre, a strength equal to that of the cast-iron guns. 



" Taking this as true, we are next met with the difficulty of holding such light guns against 

 the tendency of recoil. It must be evident to any one, that the action of the powder upon the 

 shot, is accompanied with an equal action upon the breech of tlie gun, which produces a forcible 

 recoil of the piece. The whole amount of the force of recoil, with guns of different weights, other 

 things being equal, is in the inverse ratio of the weights of the guns. Now, with guns of cast- 

 iron, of say two hundred times the weight of the shot, it is necessary, when on ship-board, to 

 restrain or check this recoil by some connection of the gun with the side of the vessel. This 

 connection is usually made by a very strong rope, called a breechiriff, by which the gun is sud- 

 denly, almost instantly, stopped, after it has passed backwards about four feet from the point 

 where it was discharged. In the outset of my experiments, I was sensible, that, unless some 

 more perfect means of governing the recoil than the common breeching was used, the full benefit 

 of lightness derived from the strength of the material could not be obtained. It would be diffi- 

 cult to hold, by the common breeching, guns which should exceed but sixty or seventy times the 

 weight of the shot, when double-shotted and fired with full charge of powder. In most of the 

 operations in practical mechanics, the method of destroying tlic superfluous force of a moving 

 body, is derived from friction. This force, if it may be called a force, has already been applied 

 to check the recoil of cannon, by applying it to a slide upon the carriage, — a method, however, 

 of applying the friction somewhat uncertain, and otherwise objectionable. Considering it of great 



* The heaviest English gun is fired with ilOO pounds nf pmvder, and shot of 1,800 pounds ; the heaviest French 

 gun, with 575 pounds of powder, and shot of 2,<)45 pounds; aud the heaviest German gun, witli ()I5 pounds of 

 powder, shot of 1,6-32 pounds. The extreme mean range of these guus is over nine and a half miles. — Major J. P. 

 Sawyer, in Harper's Weekly, April 2, 1887. 



