GUNS AND AMMUNITION 



4*5 



with the high-power rifles which were ex- 

 pected to banish the bayonet and reduce war 

 to long range shooting, have upset the 

 theories formulated by experts after the 

 Boer war and demonstrated the usefulness of 

 cold steel as an instrument of wholesale 

 homicide. Therefore, distribution of the new 

 -Springfield rifle has been deferred, and the 

 so-called experts of the War Department 

 are considering the question of adapting a 

 practical bayonet to the weapon. 



In many respects the new army weapon is 

 a botch, but no other feature is quite so 

 ridiculous as the ''rod" bayonet. This al- 

 leged bayonet is supposed to be both cleaning- 

 rod and man-sticker, but it is a combination 

 futility. It is shorter than the barrel, and 

 therefore cannot be used as a cleaner. The 

 point is shaped like a drill for boring metal, 

 and is not sharp enough to penetrate clothing 

 readily. The rod is smaller than an ordin- 

 ary lead pencil, and when fixed as a bayonet 

 it protrudes only about ten inches and is 

 held in position by a weak spring catch, 

 which a light tap from an opposing bayonet 

 would release, thereby causing the rod either 

 to fall out entirely or to retreat into the 

 socket. As a weapon, the rod is ridiculous ; 

 as a menace, its moral effect upon rioters 

 would be about equal to that of a brandished 

 umbrella stick. 



The rifle itself is a marvel of clumsiness 

 and bad balance. It is needlessly heavy for 

 its length, and the weight is not well dis- 

 tributed. The stock is crudely fashioned 

 and looks like the first attempt of a poor 

 carpenter to make a gunstock with a hand- 

 saw. A flint-lock musket of 1776 was a bet- 

 ter-finished, neater-looking arm. If it is 

 intended that the soldier shall grasp his 

 rifle by the barrel and use the butt as a club, 

 perhaps the stock is well designed. Certain- 

 ly the butt, swung by strong arms, would be 

 a better weapon than the absurd rod-bayonet. 



The excuse for making military rifle stocks 

 crude and clumsy is that they are subjected 

 to' rough usage and need to be strong, but 

 no soldier's Weapon gets any rougher treat- 

 ment than the sporting rifle sometimes gets 

 in the hands of a big game hunter in the 

 mountains. Yet the makers of sporting rifles 

 have not found it necessary to mount their 

 barrels on pieces of two by four, roughly 

 hewn to the approximate shape of a stock. 

 The government armorers and ordnance 

 boards could, if they would, learn much 

 from the men who make and use small arms 

 for hunting. Indeed, what little they do 

 know about barrels, sights and ammunition 

 has been hammered into their dense official 

 heads by civilian riflemen. 



Shortening the barrel of the military arm, 

 for example, was announced as a great idea 

 evolved by officialdom, whereas the efficacy 

 and superior convenience of the short bar- 



rel had been demonstrated years before by 

 sportsmen, and recognized by the makers of 

 sporting rifles. It has taken the military mind 

 a long time to grasp the idea that a rifle' is 

 put into a soldier's hands to shoot with, 

 and that shouldering, presenting, and ground- 

 ing arms in one, two, three order is not 

 the only end to be attained. 



Among the glaring defects of the new 

 Springfield is the elevating sight, which is 

 weak, unsupported when raised and liable 

 to be knocked out of place. The aperture 

 or peep hole in the rear sight, for long range 

 shooting, is so small as to be practically use- 

 less in action. A speck of dust will put it out 

 of business. 



The merits of the piece are the strength and 

 simplicity of the bolt action, the reduced 

 length of barrel, and the perfection of the 

 system of rifling, assuming that the bore 

 is as good as it is represented. 



Allen Kelly. 



We print the foregoing, most willingly, as 

 we believe in the "open court," but we should 

 like Mr. Kelly to name a single military rifle 

 made by any foreign power, that is, in his 

 opinion, better stocked than the new U. S. 

 rifle. The rifle was a bold experiment in 

 more than one detail, and will, no doubt, have 

 to be modified, but the old adage "nothing 

 venture, nothing have" applies to govern- 

 ments as well as to individuals. 



FEATHERS AND NOSE-RINGS. 

 From the German press we learn that an 

 association of young men in Berlin, who are 

 opposed to the practice of women wearing 

 birds on their hats, have adopted a unique 

 crusade in their campaign against this prac- 

 tice. First of all, the woman who uses bird 

 plumage on her headgear is to be warned by 

 a circular sent to her address, the circular 

 containing the information that, if she does 

 not voluntarily refrain from wearing the hat 

 it will be removed by force. We can see the 

 finish of these well-meaning young Germans 

 if their plan is carried out in facts; but the 

 movement may serve its purpose by attract- 

 ing attention to this barbarous custom, a 

 memory of the time when women, in addition 

 to feathers, wore nose-rings. 



A CREDIT OVERLOOKED. 

 Dan Read, Esq. : 



In the story of the black sheep country 

 that you published in your April number 

 there was an illustration of an Ovis Montana 

 head from Southern British Columbia. I 

 made the drawing from a head owned by 

 W. F. Sheard, of Tacoma, Wash. Mr. 

 Sheard gave me permission to draw the head 

 and I should have given him credit. 



Belmore H. Browne. 



