Perhaps a secret entrance, or ladders, may be 
and are to be applied if circumstances will per- 
© pre tnd ating salt petite lle 
up very long. Even if pene- 
‘one part, he may be again repulsed if not very 
or if his succours do not arrive in time. 
more circu to it are to be ta- 
and are 
works are to be oc- 
manner, that each ma 
to be 
SOR er nees Mannan WeeksaedS lee efend. 
* . 
fe 
ia 
| 
ek 
a 
i 
; 
i 
tr 
28 
f 
i 
: 
el 
. 
z 
<= 
& 
; 
FORTIFICATION. 
519 
render of the town. In all cases, however, the retreat Attack and 
of the enemy is if possible to be cut off. —— 
A most advan s attack of such a town is made “sions. 
by tirailleurs, in same manner as has been explain- —— 
ed in the Section on the Attack of Permanent Fortifica« 
tions. 
Sketch of Cannor’s Method of Defending Fortified 
et. 
Places. 
From the account which we have now given of the 
attack and defence of fortified places, the reader must 
have observed, that when a fortress is regularly invest- 
ed, however strong it may be, its fall after a certain 
iod is consi as a matter of course. The maxi- : 
mum of that period we formerly stated at 90 days. In Duration of 
the actual state of things, however, it seldom exceeds * sate ‘aa 
the half of that, and even this is considered a good Vivica, 
defence. In proof of these remarks, we subjoin the 
calculation which Vauban gives of the duration of a 
siege, supposing the place to be strongly fortified and 
well garrisoned. 
Days: 
From the investment of the place till the open- 
ing of the trenches . . 2. 2 se se . 
From the opening of the trenches till the attack 
of the covered way 22.0 55. 8) 
The attack and capture of the covered way . 
Passage of the fossé of the demi-lune . . . 
Making a icable breach in the ravelin 
Taking the reduit of the ravelin . . . . . 
Passage of the great ditch commencing before the 
2 ea Senge dae tel ig 
aking a practicable breach in the place . . 
Defence of the breaches . . 1... . 
Surrender of the place after capitulation . . 
Negligence and errors of the enemy . . . 
Total . . 
We have already observed, that the application of such 
calculations to the operations of moral causes, may per« 
at first si absurd. Itis to be remem 
a ower tet Bien the superior force which the be- 
siegers can always command, it is impossible that any 
place can hold out for an indefinite period. It seems Laws tecog- 
reasonable, therefore, that certain laws should be esta- "ised by na- 
SHV OP MLO 
efea: 
blished nations with regard to the surrender of si the 
fortified places, in order to prevent the obstinacy of ap weer 
an individual being the cause of an unnecessary effu- pieces, 
sion of human blood. Such laws have accordingly Sounded on 
been generall ised, and those who ere in the above 
their defence of a pace, after it ought by these laws to > wa 
surrender, are considered as having deprived them- 
selves of the pri ted to prisoners of 
war. A modern writer on fortification, M. now Count Carnot re» 
Carnot, has, however, advanced a very different doc- jects these 
trine, _ Retsoning on that fundamental principle of mi- me 
litary discipline, that every soldier ought to die rather 
than give up his post, he maintains, that such calcula- 
tions as we have detailed above, are erally false, 
only to crush 
condemns every thing that tends in the slightest de« 
to depress or extin these. Such reasoning, 
ever, would scarcely be entitled to notice, and cer- 
tainly would never contribute, in any essential degree, 
