342 
the principles of the method by his pamphlet.of 1855 was not before the 
public earlier than the end of July, 1855 (though dated in his Preface 
27th of June, 1855), nearly a month after my paper had been read to this 
Academy. 
His earliest evidence of having made public either his knowledge or 
use of the method, therefore, takes date between five and six months 
posterior to mine, and the right of priority rests with me. 
Upon the second issue, between Captain Blakely and Dr. Hart, as 
respects priority in mathematical investigation of the strength of ordnance 
made according to this method and the law of tensions of the rings; 
Dr. Hart published his investigation by communicating it to me (and I 
to others), on the 6th of July, 1855. Captain Blakely published his 
investigation in his earliest pamphlet, which was not issued before the 
end of July or the beginning of August, as stated to me by his own 
publisher. 
Dr. Hart’s publication, therefore, takes the earlier date by about a 
month, and the right of priority remains with him. 
These verdicts are substantially in agreement with a formal report 
of the Ordnance Select Committee, made by direction of the Minister of 
War, at Captain Blakely’s own desire, dated 15th of January, 1858, 
and drawn up by Colonel Eardly Wilmot, R. A., an officer whose scien- 
tific abilities are known to some of this Academy, and to whose gentle- 
manly impartiality I can myself bear witness. That Report decides that, 
whoever was the first inventor of the method of ringed construction, 
Captain Blakely was not. 
After this marshalling of facts and dates, the Academy will receive, 
for what it is worth, Captain Blakely’s assurance to them in his paper 
of the 14th of May last, that ‘he had taken such precautions to keep 
his proceedings secret, that it is utterly impessible Mr. Mallet could 
have learnt anything from him’’—rather so truly—inasmuch as, without 
any secrecy in question, my learning was at least five months in advance 
of his own. 
As respects myself, I will only venture to say this: that, in the 
text of the paper on the Construction of Artillery, read by me to this 
Academy in 1855, I believe the clearest and most complete enunciation 
of the general principles and methods of construction of built-up guns, 
published up to this day, are to be found. I have been assured by the 
renowned artillerist, Colonel Cavalli, of the Sardinian Army, and by 
officers of the army of the United States, that that paper is looked 
upon in Europe and in America as the foundation from which much 
of the improvement of ordnance since the date of its publication has 
originated. Its views, antecedent in time, are the sarne as. those upon 
which the much-talked-of Armstrong guns, are constructed. For this 
we may take Captain Blakely’s own words, who, in the celebrated gun 
discussion of this year at the Institution of Civil Engineers, London, is re- 
ported (Minute of Proceedings, Ins. C. E., Sess. 1859-60, p. 60) to have 
said :—‘‘ The barrel of the Armstrong gun was an example of the mode 
of construction recommended by Mr. Mallet. Any person following the 
