304 
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF 
which was found not to answer its intended purpose of forcing the lead 
to take the grooves. 
The Enfield rifle—so called from the Royal Small-Arm Factory, 
Enfield Lock, Middlesex—included several patterns to suit the various 
branches of the service; viz., the long Enfield for the rank and file of 
the infantry, the short Enfield for serjeants and rifle regiments, the 
naval rifle, the artillery carbine, and the cavalry carbine. The Royal 
Engineers 5 weapon was not, properly speaking, an “ Enfield rifle/ 5 as 
it had a different system of rifling—namely, Lancaster 5 s oval bore, in 
lieu of grooves. 
Owing to the great advantages of a breech-loader for infantry, as 
illustrated by the needle gun in the Hano-German war of 1864, all the 
above, including the Lancaster, were converted to breech-loaders on 
the Snider plan. 
Sharpe 5 s, Terry 5 s, and Westley-Richards 5 cavalry breech-loading 
carbines had been previously adopted on trial. Their success was only 
partial, for none of them had gas-tight cartridges (which is now con¬ 
sidered essential to a breech-loading small-arm), and all were fitted 
for percussion caps—a most inconvenient arrangement on horseback. 
Terry 5 s carbine was issued to the Cape Mounted Rifles (since dis¬ 
banded), and is not now in use, and Sharpe 5 s was used by some of our 
cavalry regiments in India; Westley-Richards 5 —which was the best of 
the three—is now in the hands of the yeomanry cavalry. 
The converted Sniders were very efficient, being not liable to go out 
of repair,* and being three times as rapid in fire as the muzzle-loading 
Enfield; and—what is a very great convenience in regard to stores— 
all six arms (including the Lancaster) took precisely the same ammu¬ 
nition ; but nevertheless it soon became a recognised necessity that we 
should obtain the very best procurable weapon for our infantry. 
Accordingly, in 1866, the War Office appointed a Committee for the 
purpose, and offered prizes—£1000 for the best rifled barrel, and £600 
for the most efficient breech-loading arrangement. Out of 104 arms 
submitted, the Committee selected nine for further trial. None of the 
rifled barrels reached the required standard of excellence, but Mr. Henry 5 s 
breech-loading arrangement won for him the prize of £600. 
Evidence was then taken from General Hay (Hythe), Colonels Boxer 
and Dickson, Messrs. Whitworth, Lancaster, Rigby, Abel, Burton, Kerr, 
Henry, &c., &c., as to the proper calibre, length, and spiral for an in¬ 
fantry rifle-barrel, and it was gathered from their evidence that a barrel 
35 ins. long and *45 in. calibre would give the most favourable results. 
Further competition with barrels answering these conditions was accord¬ 
ingly invited, and took place ; and at length, in 1869, having thoroughly 
tested the weapon for initial velocity, low trajectory, accuracy, rapidity 
of fire, simplicity of action, and non-liability to get out of order,! the 
* One Snider rifle fired 72,000 rounds, under Major Majendie’s supervision, without requiring any 
repair, and was still perfectly serviceable. 
f It penetrated 14 elm planks |-in. thick against 8 with the Snider and other competitive arms. 
It could be fired without aim 25 rounds in a minute. The breech-action had only 27 parts, whereas 
the Snider had 39, and it stood the test of sand, water, and rust to which it was exposed. It has> 
however, been asserted very recently that premature explosion is likely to take place from the 
accumulation of sand or rust under the trigger-shoulder. 
