EVOLUTION OF GUNS AND RIFLES 
The fuller development of the choke, with a constriction of from two- to 
four -hundredths of an inch, soon followed, with the surprising result 
of an increase in the closeness of the pattern of some 80 per cent, accom- 
panied by a substantial gain in penetration. It was no wonder that choke 
bores became the rage. At the standard distance for trials of forty yards, 
the number of pellets of No. 6 shot which could be put into a 30 -inch circle 
with the cylinder bore was from 100 to 120; with the choke it was 200 
to 220, making the escape of a bird within that circle very improbable, 
instead of very likely. The charm of the increase of killing range carried 
all before it, and it is only now after some forty years that a reasonable 
reaction in public opinion has shown itself, and it is recognized that at 
the distances of from twenty to thirty yards at which the preponderating 
number of shots are taken, the cylinder gun is, in the hands of the great 
majority of shooters, a more effective killing weapon than the choke bore. 
Satisfaction in bringing off long shots is too dearly bought by increased 
difficulty in killing the much more frequent shots at nearer range. 
The gradual change from the use of iron to that of steel as the material 
of barrels need not detain us long. For centuries steel was an intractable 
material, strong but brittle, and lacking in toughness. Naturally enough it 
was considered to be for ever unsuitable for gunbarrels. Experiment with 
it for this purpose had led to disaster. When therefore improved processes 
produced a mild steel it was long under suspicion, and only very gradually 
did it live down its bad reputation. In Damascus iron it was difficult to 
ensure a complete freedom from flaws, more or less minute. Steel of a 
proper ductility had an advantage in strength, and, above all, it was 
homogeneous. For guns of the better classes it has completely superseded 
iron at the present time. Whether fluid compressed steel, or good steel 
of less special make, it has an ample margin of strength. Its simple surface 
lacks indeed the fine “ figure ” of the twisted barrels; yet use is largely 
the arbiter of taste; steel shows a sleek and uniform surface; and the 
elegance of the gun cannot be said to have suffered by the change. One 
charge only has been preferred against modern steel barrels, that with 
rapid firing they heat more rapidly than iron ones, an accusation which 
has not checked the preference for them. The advent of steels of special 
strength and toughness, which alone make it possible to utilize high 
pressures in modern rifles, has quite out-classed the best outcome of 
the limited metallurgy of the earlier Victorian era, good though that may 
have been. 
307 
