112 
GUN-COTTON. 
but, like them, it enormously extends human power, and, like them, the skill to use it 
can be rightly and certainly acquired. 
The object of this paper is to extend the knowledge and skill of my countrymen in 
the use of this new power. It is, I believe, of far more value to England than to any 
other nation in the world. It is, in my opinion, a power capable of being extensively 
used for a multitude of purposes yet unheard of; and I believe it will play an important 
part in the destinies of England. 
The first question we naturally ask on the introduction of a new power is, what are 
to be its advantages over existing powers and processes ? In regard to gun-cotton, we 
at once ask, therefore, what are its advantages over gunpowder ? Is it stronger ? Is it 
more convenient ? Is it cheaper ? Why should we give up gunpowder and take to 
gun-cotton? The answers to these questions categorically will best introduce it to the 
English reader. 
I. Is gun-cotton stronger than gunpowder? The answer to this is, Yes, sixfold 
stronger. 
By this we mean that if we take a given weight of gun-cotton, say four ounces, if we 
bore a hole 1| inch in diameter and 3 feet deep, into hard rock or slate, in a quarry, and 
put 4 ounces of gun-cotton into it, it will occupy about 1 foot of its length, and the 
aperture being closed in the usual manner, and a matchline led from the charge to the 
proper distance from which to fire it; and if we next take 24 ounces of best gunpowder, 
bore a similar hole, and charge it similarly with gunpowder, and close it in the same 
way ; it has been found that, on these being exploded, the 4 ounces of gun-cotton have 
produced greater effect, in separating the rock into pieces, than the 24 ounces of gun¬ 
powder. The answer is, therefore, that in disruptive explosion the strength of gun¬ 
cotton is sixfold that of good gunpowder. 
But the disruptive or bursting power of gunpowder is not always the quality for 
which we value it most, nor the service we require of it. In mining rocks, in exploding 
shells, in blowing up fortresses, this property is what we value, and this work is what 
we require. But we do not want to burst our fowling-pieces, our rifles, our cannon. On 
the contrary, we want to use a force that shall project the projectile out of the gun 
without bursting the gun, without straining the gun beyond a given moderate limit, 
which it shall be able to endure. We want therefore a service from gun-cotton which 
shall be the contrary of destructive to, or disruptive of, the chamber in which it does 
ihe work of giving motion to the projectile. 
This moderated and modified work, gun-cotton can also perform; and it is the modern 
discovery of General Lenk which has enabled us to moderate and modify gun-cotton 
to this gentler service. lie discovered how to organize, arrange, and dispose mecha¬ 
nically of gun-cotton in such a way that it should be three times stronger than gun¬ 
powder. Accordingly, one of his charges of gun-cotton, weighing 16 ounces, projected 
a 12-pound solid round shot with a speed of 1426 feet a second, while a charge of 
gunpowder of 49 ounces gave the same shot a speed of 1400 feet a second. One-third 
of the weight of gun-cotton exceeded, therefore, the threefold weight of gunpowder in 
useful effect. 
II. Is gun-cotton more convenient than gunpowder? This is a larger and more 
various question than the former, and divides itself into various subdivisions. 
It is well known to sportsmen, to soldiers, to artillery-men, that gunpowder fouls a 
gun. A foul residue of soot, sulphur, and potash soils the inside of the gun after every 
charge. The gun must, somehow, be cleaned after a discharge; if not, it fires worse, re¬ 
coils more, and ceases to do its best. If the gun be a breech-loading gun, its mechanism 
is dirted, and works less easily. Gun-cotton deposits no residue, leaves the gun clean 
and clear, and the utmost it does is to leave a gentle dew of clear water on the inside of 
the bore, this water being the condensed steam which forms one of the products of its 
decomposition. Gun-cotton is, therefore, superior to gunpowder in not fouling the gun, 
•—a result favourable both to quicker and more accurate firing. 
It is further a matter of no slight convenience that gun-cotton makes no smoke. In 
mines the smoke of gunpowder makes the air unbreathable, and for some time after ex¬ 
plosion the miners cannot return to their work. In boring the great tunnel of Mont 
Genis through the Alps, the delay from smoke of powder alone will postpone the open¬ 
ing of the line for many months. After a properly-conducted explosion of gun-cotton, 
the workmen may proceed in their work at once without inconvenience. 
