486 
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF 
8 cwt. That carriage must be strong enough to withstand the furious 
jolts it is subject to behind a team rushing to the front at a gallop; at 
the same time it must be recollected, that the heavier the gun the less 
the carriage will suffer in firing. The best possible ratio of weights of 
gun and carriage is a nice point, which only long experience can decide. 
I am well satisfied so far, that in the breech-loading guns of the service, 
the guns should be heavier and the carriages lighter, and that the ratio 
I have proposed is far preferable. 
8. Finally, as to calibre. It has been found that to get the best 
shooting, the shell should be between two and three calibres long ‘ at 
the same time, to be efficient when burst, it should have adequate capa¬ 
city for containing bullets, segments, and powder. If you take 3 inches 
as the calibre for a 9 lb. projectile, you get very formidable segment 
and shrapnel, with, I think, sufficiently powerful common shell and 
case shot. If you take a larger calibre than 3 inches, the two latter 
projectiles would have a larger capacity, but the shooting of the 
explosive projectiles would be deteriorated. If you go below 3 inches, the 
capacity of the explosive projectiles would be lessened, with perhaps a 
slight gain in shooting. Small variations above and below 3 inches would 
probably make little difference, but if you were to go to 3*5" or 2*5" 
for a 9 lb. projectile, I think you would be wrong. 
As an instance in point, the French field gun has a calibre of 3*4 inches, 
and weighs 6J cwt.; it fires with a velocity of 1066 feet per second, and 
complaints are very justly made of its high trajectory. 
9. The gun that I think we should adopt for the horse artillery in 
India, is a gun of about 8 cwt. of 3" calibre, with thirty-four 9 lb. pro¬ 
jectiles, with the gun and limber, and a total weight of 32 to 33 cwt. 
behind the team. This is the gun recommended by the Committee on 
Field Artillery Equipment for India. 
The main points, it appears to me, on which this recommendation 
should meet with the approval of thoughtful artillerymen are: that 
on this system you have a sufficient number of projectiles, with a gun 
capable of projecting them with a very high velocity, involving a total 
weight behind the gun-team quite within the recognised limits for 
horse artillery. 
10. I have prepared a table from various authorities, chiefly from 
Major Roerdansz** pamphlet, giving the principal weights and dimen¬ 
sions of various horse artillery guns and their equipment. It is 
instructive to examine how the artillery of the powers of Europe differ 
as to the armament of that branch. The French and Austrians agree 
very closely; the gun of the latter being founded on the former. The 
English and the Prussians are in many respects alike, but the latter 
carry the largest number of rounds with the limber of all the artilleries 
of Europe, and are therefore more independent of their wagons. The 
Russian and the Indian gun systems are the absolute antithesis of each 
other. 
* Das gazogene vierpfundige Feldgeschutz v. E. Eoerdansz, Berlin, 1865; 
