26 
MINUTES OF PKOCEEDINGS OF 
General Wilmot, when Commandant of the School of Gunnery, sup¬ 
ported the opinion expressed by Lieut. Reeves; and finally, Capt. Hood, 
on behalf of the Naval School of Gunnery, recommends smaller balls 
than those employed, and the Director-General of Naval Ordnance 
writes to support General Boxer in asking for a decrease in size. One 
is at a loss to find the individual who really has succeeded—in the teeth 
of so many authorities on the subject—in keeping these large sand 
shot in the service; and perhaps one is at just as great a loss to find 
anything but objections to them. 
They are much more liable to injure the gun; therefore the iron 
linings have to be absurdly heavy, and hence take up a disproportionate 
share of the very limited weight allowed to case shot. Again, the larger 
balls do not pack nearly as close ; hence the projectile is longer than 
necessary, and this again increases the weight of the lining and decreases 
the quantity of the case shot. 
It may be urged that, for large guns, the ground in front is generally 
known to be flat, and suited to ricochet of balls, and hence the range 
may be extended very greatly ; to which it may be replied, that any 
troops who would leave trenches and expose themselves to the fire of 
case shot, for a longer distance than 300 yds., would not only be 
lunatics, but might be considered as nearly harmless lunatics. 
But, indeed, while I wish to praise the service projectiles, I cannot 
say that case shot appear to me to have been satisfactorily worked out 
yet. I think the actual use of case on active service has been to some 
extent lost sight of. Surely case may be said to be used only at critical 
moments, and questions of slight fouling—an objection urged against 
rosin—hardly deserves consideration, while increase of smoke would be 
a positive advantage; for the infantry would be at a range at which 
their fire would be most deadly, and case require little aim and 
no elevation—in fact, as the committee observe, they graze better and 
closer to the ground when delivered horizontally. 
So, again, expense is a very dubious objection to urge strongly 
against lead and antimony balls; for the objection amounts to this—we 
cannot afford to fire the best and heaviest balls against infantry who 
are within 300 or 400 yds. of us, and perhaps rushing at our guns, 
because they cost £25 a ton; we must rather fire sand shot, at £14 a ton. 
I now speak more especially with reference to the smaller calibres, and 
I would say that of all projectiles—considering the moments when 
it is used—expense should carry least weight in the matter of case 
shot. 
Then again, why is the weight to be cut down to the limits pro¬ 
posed? Take, for example, the 8" case. This will weigh 68 lbs. and 
contains seventy-five 8 oz. sand shot—that is, it fires 37 lbs. weight of 
balls; the other service projectiles for the same gun weighing 180 lbs. 
each. In spite, no doubt, of a greatly inferior velocity, I hold the old 
smooth-bore 42-pr.—which fired exactly nine more of the very same 
sand shot—just as good a projectile. With a 42-pr. cast-iron gun com¬ 
peting against a 180-pr. rifled gun, I think I am justified in saying 
that case, for rifled ordnance, are in a very imperfect state of development. 
But I may be told that two case shot may be fired at once. Certainly, 
