muzzle versus breech loaders. 73 



that the disconnecting of the barrels from their abut- 

 ment ; that the complete separation of the chambers 

 from their bases, were not signs of weakness ; while 

 his knowledge of what constitutes fitness in any gun, 

 whether muzzle or breech loader, would lead him to 

 conclude that movable barrels would be very liable to 

 get out of order in springing even but slightly at their 

 joints. 



I know it will be said, in answer to all this, that 

 these guns have been in use for some time, and have 

 not given in the slightest degree any indication of 

 weakness at the breech. But I can say in reply, that 

 while I am not aware of any instances of their burst- 

 ing, I have seen some of these guns that have sprung 

 at the joints, -making quite a gap in the abutment. 

 And why should they not ? for not only in my opinion 

 is the piece of iron welded on to the barrels under- 

 neath, partly for a pivot to assist in tipping, and partly 

 for security to the stock, too small and weak for 

 the purpose desired, but the piece of iron which holds 

 the barrels to the abutment seems to me to bear 

 altogether too much strain for its position. Beside, 

 this latter piece of iron is subjected to the constant wear 

 and tear of loading, and it seems to me only reasonable 

 that it should work loose. I must confess, therefore, 

 that I do not think these tipping barrels scientifically 

 mounted. I believe that the strain of explosion in the 

 barrels should be borne equally or proportionally by 

 the surrounding or supporting parts, instead of falling 

 wholly upon a point underneath the barrels. 



I have also another objection to state against the 

 4 



