THE EOYAL AETILLEEY INSTITUTION. 
29 
charges necessary for short ranges, becomes very difficult. I have gone 
so far, therefore, as to suggest the trial of some fixed charge, the mortar 
being laid at angles varying from 45° ttpwards, the greater elevations 
being thus used with the smaller ranges. I believe this to be worth a 
trial, because, in addition to the constant velocity so desirable with a 
rotating projectile, the velocity on impact would become enormously 
increased at the shorter ranges, and perhaps would be such always as 
to make it well worth while to fire vertical Boxer shrapnel—which I 
recommend with the more confidence because it has been proposed both 
by General Shrapnel and General Boxer, and its power, under the 
circumstances I describe, would become very much increased. I read 
that a very crude experiment was made in this direction in the late 
American war—that is, shrapnel were tried, fired on the regular old 
mortar system, with good effect. 
The advantage of having such a projectile might be very great—certain 
systems of fortification have depended almost entirely on vertical case; 
but though the moral effect is considerable, they have faults. They 
cannot be fired over the heads of one's own troops; they scatter too 
widely for good effect on any particular spot; the striking velocity is 
but small, and they cannot be used at long ranges. Even at 260 yds. 
range I remember a man getting a stiff knee for life from the impact of 
a vertical sand shot ; but at shorter ranges its effects would be less* 
Vertical shrapnel would be liable to none of these defects. Its range is 
not limited; it might be fired over the heads of one's own troops; it 
would not scatter too much, and its striking velocity might be, probably* 
all that need be desired. Does it not appear—in these days of gun-pits 
and extended cover—that some effective vertical missile for troops is 
required ? Probably most officers who have been under the vertical 
fire of mortar shell will confess that their moral effect wears off; and as 
to the actual effect, it is surprising how many shells will burst harmlessly 
on the ground, with men stooping or lying within a few feet of them. 
It requires a little careful thought to see why it is that so many shells 
may burst in a battery and injure no one at all; and I would put the 
question to any officer, whether he thinks it likely that if half a dozen 
of the mortar shell that fell closest to him had been replaced by shrapnel 
opening near the ground, he could have escaped. 
But to pass at once to the last point I have to touch on— 
Segment and Shrapnel Shells , and their Fuzes* 
The Armstrong and Whitworth, the Ordnance Select, and the Dart¬ 
moor Committees have all had this question before them. While Boxer 
shrapnel have come in for heavy guns and siege guns, and have to a 
great extent superseded segment shells, with field guns the matter is 
hotly contested. 
The shrapnel has a comparatively close cone of dispersion, and the 
shower of its bullets is therefore effective for a greatly prolonged dis¬ 
tance, and is consequently less affected by slight errors in boring the 
fuze—hence it offers great advantages as compared with the segment for 
time fuzes; besides, the momentum and penetration of its bullets are 
