388 
Sept. 25, 1875. 
liver its load into the smallest area of space, the force 
with which such load is delivered being a matter rarely 
questioned, or at most considered of secondary import- 
ance.” Xow, just fasten Mr. Greener’s “Whereas, 
etc.,” to this, and give him the benefit of your con- 
clusions. 
In his next paragraph, speaking of the guns bored by 
Mr. Haynes, and pretending to quote from me, he says: 
“ I may well regret not having secured records of these 
guns at thirty-inch targets, when I go on to state that 
only two shots were fired, and upon these two shots 1 
draw my conclusions, and state his best gun was 
beaten.” “Is it possible,” he asks here, “that I can 
seriously put into print such a statement ? ” To which 
I must say decidedly, No ! unless it might be when I 
am seriously drunk, and then, though possible, it is not 
at all probable. But I am well satisfied I never could 
get sufficiently drunk to afterward attempt to father 
the statement upon another. And not being in the habit 
of getting drunk at all, I prefer to adopt a totally differ- 
ent method of argument. I did say, seriously and 
soberly, that “ a man named Hajmes bored guns on the 
choke principle twenty-five years ago, and made them 
shoot equal to any bored at the present day,” all of 
which I can easily substantiate if necessary, and I gave 
his method of so doing, but I did not mention anything 
about firing only two shots with his guns, or having re- 
grets that I had not secured records of them at thirty- 
inch targets. I did, further on, give records of other 
guns (naming makers, etc.,) at targets measuring one 
foot square, aU superior to any Mr. Greener has yet ex- 
hibited, and here I did say I regretted not having secured 
records of these guns at thirty-inch targets, simply be- 
cause a correct comparison with the field trial records 
which are at thirty-inch targets would then be rendered 
more easy. And where I mentioned that only two shots 
were fired was in writing of seeing Greener’s best gun 
beaten at thirty-inch targets by a Shaefer gun about a 
month before. 
But we are told by Mr. Greener that “ these private 
trials afford no criterion whatever if used for the pur- 
pose of bringing them Jinto comparison with the ‘field’ 
trial where they have not complied with Us stringent 
regulations and conditions, and the only fair criterion 
can be obtained by the average of a number of shots 
taken under exactly similar conditions and circumstan- 
ces.” Would it be a fair test of the shooting powers of 
two rifles to compare the depth to which their projec- 
tiles penetrated into solid oak, where one was allowed 
to use a steel-pointed or hardened bullet, while the other 
used one composed entirely of soft lead? Not one 
whit more unfair than the late “field” trial with its 
“stringent regulations,” etc., in which Mr. Greener came 
off victorious, not because his gun was the best shooter 
(which, however, the managers gave it credit for being), 
but because he used the “Newcastle hardened shot,” 
while many others used the ordinary soft shot of “Wal- 
ker and Parker’s” manufacture. DnluckUy for Mr. 
Greener the unfairness of the whole thing was accident- 
ally demonstrated at the conclusion of the “wear and 
tear” trial (too late for justice, however), when before 
returning them to their makers, for curiosity’s sake, the 
three highest guns, Greener’s, Baker’s’ and Maleham’s, 
were fired with soft shot. Please mark the result. Mr. 
Greener’s gun, which had always been at the front, now 
takes a seat, way back. With hard shot Mr. Greener’s 
gun had given, after 144 shots, an average pattern of 
185 pellets; penetration (number of sheets multiplied 
by six) 151.5. Maleham’s gun, pattern 182.3, penetra- 
tion 135. Parker’s gun, pattern 161.4, penetration 137.7. 
With Walker and Baker’s soft shot GreenePs gun gave 
an average pattern of 117.6 ! penetration 115. ! Male- 
ham’s gun (same day), pattern 130.1; penetration 109. 
Baker’s gun (same day), pattern 118. ; penetration 124. 
Further. So far from showing the increase of 20 per 
cent, remarked by the Field editor, both in pattern and 
penetration over the trial of 1866, there is actually shown 
a falling off in both respects from the results obtained 
by the gun Mr. Greener entered in the former trial, 
which gave pattern, 121.4, and penetration 151.8, with 
Walker and Parker’s shot. This former trial, remem- 
ber, took place long before Mr. Greener discovered his 
new (?) system, or rather the advantage of using hard- 
ened shot. 
When I wrote “in regaid to strength ot shooting, 
choke-boring was rather a detriment than an advan- 
tage,” I gave, I think, sound reasons to accoimt 
for it, and when Mr. Greener can give us any 
plausible reason why it should be otherwise 
I will be ready to consider it; but his “ blarney” about 
what the “ field” trial proved (when, in fact, it proved 
nothing in regard to strength of shooting) has no bear- 
ing whatever on the matter. The number of sheets of 
paper penetrated by the different guns in that trial no 
more determines their strength of shooting than was de- 
termined before they were fired at all. Do you wish us 
to think, Mr. Greener, that the lower penetration ob- 
tained by the use of soft shot was due to the fact that 
they were propelled with less force than the harder shot, 
which gave deeper penetration ? Are we to judge that 
the strength of shooting displayed by your gun at differ- 
ent discharges in the trial of soft shot, varied as the num- 
ber of sheets penetrated? If so, It is certainly a poor gun 
to depend upon, scoring all the way from 13 to 24 sheets 
in the trial. Can you give any better reason for the fact 
that the pattern of the hard shot was superior to 
that of the soft, than because they suffered less from 
jamming and friction at the muzzle? 
In the issue of Rod aitd Gns bearing date June 19, 
1875, I endeavored to show why it was impossible to 
measure correctly the striking force of shot by means 
of Pettit pads, giving, at the same time, a practical meth- 
od by which the force could be rightly estimated, and 
to that article (which, at the time, was erroneously cred- 
ited to Recapper) I would respectfully refer Mr. Greener 
and such of my readers as may care for it, instead of at- 
tempting a wearisome repetition of its arguments here — 
satisfied, if they will give the method therein advocated 
a thorough trial, it will prove to be all I have claimed 
for it. 
One remark of mine which Mr. Greener objects to 
with some reason, that “ choke bores do not retain their 
original shooting powers as long as relief bores with equal 
use,” should truly have been qualified a little, and made 
to read: “ Guns choke bored very strongly do not,” etc. 
— for the strain at the muzzle tending to open it and im- 
pair closeness of shooting, will vary in accordance with 
the amount and st 5 ’le of choke given, and in a gun verj’ 
slightly choked the strain may not at any time be suffi- 
cient to have this effect. 
In conclusion, considering the conviction expressed 
by Mr. Greener, it will not, 1 hope, be attributed to van- 
ity, or thought out of place here for me to inform him 
that, in my experience with choke bores, I have fired 
them at game more than ten times as many shots as his 
gun was fired (2,570) in the “ wear-and-tear” trial; also, 
that I have myself bored guns over three years ago to do 
equally as well as any recorded in my former article, 
all of which should, I think, be sufficient to at least enti- 
tle me to an opinion. As to why the guns mentioned 
“ were not entered in the New York or Chicago trials,” 
I would say, not being in the gun business, I had noth- 
ing to gain if they won, and considerable to lose, both 
in time and expense, whether they did or not. 'Wish- 
ing Mr. Greener all the success his new system deserves, 
and trusting in his next letter he will represent me more 
fairly, I remain, J. W. Long. 
Instinct and Reason. 
Keene, N. H., Sept. 11. 
I send you a “ small shot,” which is vouched for by 
THE R IFLE. 
Creedmoor. 
Six hundred and fifty men of the Third Brigade, in- 
eluding sections of the Seventh, Eighth, Ninth and 
Fifty-fifth regiments, were at Creedmoor Friday, 10th. 
In the forenoon an accident happened to Louis King, of 
Company F, Seventh Regiment, who was pushing a 
short flagstaflf into the ground, when it snapped off, leav- 
ing a sharp-pointed stake, upon which he fell, cutting a 
long gash across his abdomen, but, it was thought by 
Assistant-Surgeon Tucker, of the Ninth, who sewed up 
the wound, not injuring the intestines. The scores made 
by the highest contestants at the longer 
ranges were : 
SEVENTH REGIMENT. 
Xames. 
Yards. 
Score. 
Priv Beebe 
1 300 
5 
5 
4 
5 
2—21 
0 
3 
4 
4 
5— 16— .37 
Corp’Dominick 
1 300 
3 
5 
4 
5 
4—21 
0 
2 
3 
4 
2-13-34 
Sergt Lane 
( 300 
2 
4 
4 
4 
4-18 
0 
4 
4 
4 
3—15—33 
Priv Bush 
t 300 
o 
4 
5 
2 
5—18 
4 
5 
2 
0 
4— 15-:i3 
Priv Flash 
\ 300 
0 
4 
5 
2 
4—15 
3 
2 
0 
3 
4-17-32 
Sergt Chauncey 
1300 
3 
5 
3 
2 
3-16 
1 400 
0 
5 
5 
3 
.3—16—32 
Priv Brasher 
1 300 
3 
4 
3 
0 
3-13 
1 40.1 
2 
3 
4 
4 
5—18-31 
Priv Hersey 
1300 
2 
4 
3 
3 
4-18 
0 
2 
4 
2 
Priv Tomes 
1.300 
5 
5 
3 
5—22 
4 
0 
0 
4 
0— 8—30 
Sergt Bacon 
1 300 
3 
4 
3 
5 
5—20 
(400 
4 
0 
0 
3 
3— lU— 30 
Priv Cumiskv 
1 300 
0 
4 
2 
4 
4-14 
4 
3 
5 
U 
4—16—30 
Priv McCready 
< 300 
4 
5 
3 
4 
3—19 
1 400 
3 
4 
0 
2 
2—11—30 
Priv Dominick 
< 300 
4 
3 
2 
3 
3 — 15 
3 
4 
2 
3 
3-15-30 
Priv Lowe 
1 300 
2 
4 
4 
4 
5—19 
4 
0 
0 
o 
4—10—29 
Priv Ketebum 
(300 
0 
2 
5 
4 
4—15 
1 400 
3 
4 
3 
2-14—29 
EIGHTH REGIMENT. 
Priv Hart 
( 300 
4 
4 
o 
5 
4—19 
2 
5 
3 
5 
5— 22-^1 
Lieut Eoefle 
(300 
4 
2 
5 
3 
4-18 
(400 
4 
4 
4 
4 
3—21—39 
Priv Cams 
1 300 
5 
4 
5 
4 
3-22 
3 
0 
5 
4 
3-17-39 
Priv Murphy 
|300 
1400 
5 
4 
3 
3 
4 
3 
5 
4 
5-22 
2—16—38 
Lieut Gee 
( 300 
4 
4 
5 
4 
5-22 
3 
o 
4 
2 
3—14—36 
Capt Young 
( 300 
1 400 
3 
0 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
2 
4— 19 
5— 15—34 
Priv Davis 
(300 
4 
5 
5 
5 
4—23 
3 
3 
3 
0 
P—11—31 
Priv Keenan 
1 300 
3 
6 
3 
3 
3-19 
3 
3 
5 
3 
0—14—33 
Priv Clark 
< 300 
3 
4 
0 
4 
3—14 
(400 
5 
2 
3 
5 
2—17—31 
Col Scott 
( 3oa 
1400 
2 
0 
5 
3 
3 
2 
4 
3 
07 
1 1 
f 
Sergt O'Brien 
( 300 
) 400 
3 
5 
3 
3 
0 
5 
3 
4 
2—11 
2-19-30 
Priv Seers 
(300 
1400 
0 
0 
2 
3 
5 
4 
4 
2 
3-14 
5— 14— S8 
Corp Roscoe 
j 3t0 
1400 
4 
2 
5 
0 
2 
4 
5 
2 
4—20 
0— 8—28 
Priv Pinchon 
(.300 
1400 
0 
0 
5 
3 
5 
3 
2 
3 
4—16 
2—11—27 
XINTH REGIMENT. 
Priv Zettler 
J .300 
1400 
5 
2 
3 
4 
5 
3 
3 
4 
5—21 
1—15—36 
Priv Vail 
(.300 
■) 400 
4 
4 
3 
3 
3 
4 
2 
4 
2-14 
5-20-34 
Sergt Toellner 
( 300 
(400 
5 
4 
0 
0 
4 
4 
0 
4 
2—11 
2—14—25 
FIFTY-FIFTH REGIMEXT. 
Maj Zoschlag 
(.300 
1 400 
3 
5 
2 
0 
5 
5 
0 
0 
3- 13 
4— 14—27 
Priv Tietech 
J 300 
■(400 
4 
5 
0 
2 
0 
0 
4 
0 
0 — 13 
3—10—23 
a friend of mine as being true in every particular. So 
THE LUTHER BADGE. 
many items of interest to naturalists are lost because no 
one will take the trouble to record them, that I take the 
liberty of forwarding you the inclosed. It is not of 
much consequence in itself, but may help our “savants” 
to decide that the dividing line between reason and in- 
stinct is further down the scale of being than has usually 
been taught. 
Yours truly, Thos. E. Hatch. 
WAS IT INSTINCT OR REASON? 
As a farmer in a neighboring town was getting in his 
hay he noticed an unusual commotion among the swal- 
lows, which had built a long row of nests under the 
eaves of his barn. They appeared greatly excited, fly- 
ing rapidly about and filling the air with their cries of 
distress. As the load of hay upon which he was riding 
passed into the barn, he saw that a young swallow in a 
nest directly over the door had caught its neck in a 
crack between two shingles and was unable to liberate 
itself. He stopped his team and set the young bird free, 
restoring it to the nest. Upon his return to the barn 
with his next load of hay, noticing that the swallows 
were quiet he examined the crack, and found they had 
filled it completely with mud, so that no matter how 
enterprising or how foolish the young swallow might 
be, he could not again endanger his life or the peace of 
that community bj^ any experiments upon that crack. 
The truth of the above story was vouched for by a 
gentleman in whom I have perfect confidence. 
Smoke “ Vanity Faik.”— Y on will think it a pleasant companion 
—nothing more; and you will find the opinion strongly confirmed 
day by day. 
This match came oft Saturday, 11th ; nine entries ; 
distances, 800, 900 and 1,800 yards ; any position ; two 
sighting and five scoring shots at each distance. 'Wind 
uncertain, and blew raw and cold from the northwest 
diagonally across the range. "W. B. Farwell was the 
successful competitor on a score of 64 out of 75 possible. 
He shot with a Remington Creedmoor, upon which it 
had been twice previously won. 
Names. 
Yards. 
Score. 
( 800 
5 
4 
5 
3 
4—21 
W B Farwellt 
{ 900 
5 
5 
3 
5 
5-23 
(1,000 
5 
5 
3 
4 
3-20-64 
1 800 
5 
4 
2 
5 
5-21 
J S Conlin 
■{ 900 
5 
4 
2 
5 
5—21 
( 1,000 
1 800 
4 
4 
5 
5 
3—21-63 
3 
3 
4 
4 
5—19 
Gen Dakin 
J 900 
5 
5 
3 
5 
3-21 
/ 1,000 
4 800 
3 
4 
4 
5 
5-21—61 
5 
5 
5 
5 
.3—23 
K H Sanford 
•- 900 
R 
4 
5 
5 
5—19 
! 1,000 
K 
5 
3 
4 
5—17—59 
1 800 
5 
5 
5 
5 
4-24 
L Geiger 
• 900 
5 
4 
4 
2 
0—15 
\ 1.000 
4 
3 
5 
4 
3—19—58 
( 800 
5 
3 
5 
4 
2—19 
H S Jewell 
t 900 
3 
5 
5 
3 
2—18 
( 1,000 
0 
4 
R 
5 
2—11^8 
i 800 
4 
5 
5 
5 
0—19 
H Rathbone 
■{ 900 
U 
2 
0 
0 
5— 7 
( 1,000 
5 
5 
4 
4 
4-22-48 
( 800 
0 
3 
0 
3 
2- 8 
L Webber 
1 1,000 
2 
3 
5 
0 
3—13 
3 
4 
4 
2 
5—16—37 
( 800 
■>, 900 
0 
4 
3 
5 
0-12 
A J Hennion, Jr 
0 
3 
0 
2 
4— 9 
( 1,000 
THE LADIES MATCH 
5 
0 
2 
4 
4—15—36 
commenced at 2:30 p. si. There were sixty entries, rep- 
resented by as many ladies, among whom were Mrs. 
