THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION. 
173 
I maintain that this armament of heavy guns should be 
bemounted 1 disposed in two lines along the side of the Rock—one at a 
on a definite very high, and the other at a very low altitude, each line 
system. having a perfectly distinct duty to perform. By the word 
“ line,” I do not wish to convey one exact level along the face of the 
Rock, but I do mean to state that it is an error and waste of strength to 
place guns in the intervening space between the maximum height of a 
lowest and the minimum height of a highest line. The limits of this 
maximum and minimum could not be safely pointed out without careful 
calculations, observations, and drawings, and I should be sure to err if 
I attempted arbitrarily to fix such limits; indeed, without practical 
experiments added to such theoretical investigations, I should be dis¬ 
posed to regard with suspicion any definition of the minimum height 
of the highest line; but if I can satisfactorily shew that there is a 
space in which it is not possible to place a gun so as to obtain from it 
the greatest effective work of which a gun of its nature is capable, I 
think it will be admitted that there is scope for such calculations, and 
that my views are worthy of a thought. 
I may fail in my reasoning; I only desire that what I advance should 
be taken as the common-sense view of a practical artilleryman, not as 
the logical argument of a theorist; but I claim a certain amount of 
attention to what I urge, however feebly, inasmuch as I have enjoyed 
opportunities of learning the practical work of a garrison artilleryman 
which have fallen to the lot of few of my brother officers. I was one of 
the first batch of gunnery instructors trained at Shoeburyness in 1859, 
and the instruction I received there has naturally directed my attention 
to all gunnery proceedings which have come under my observation 
since; while, from having been quartered at our chief artillery stations 
in three different garrison brigades, I have had unusual opportunities of 
observing the progress of garrison artillery without falling into one 
groove. 
I assume the following, none of which I believe are open to objec¬ 
tion :— 
Axioms 1 .A, That para. 7, Part IV. “ Artillery Manual,” is 
' 1U il correct in supposing that, u against ships in motion the rate 
of firing cannot be too rapid, provided the pointing be careful.” 
2. B. To obtain rapid firing, the utmost efficiency, both in ordnance, 
stores, and men is required. 
3. C. That it is impossible to fire as rapidly from a gun whose line 
of fire is at a depression angle, as from a gun whose axis is horizontal 
or slightly elevated. (Because an additional operation is required to 
bring the gun horizontal to assist loading). 
4. D . That none, or at any rate very few, of the systems in vogue 
render armoured ships impervious to even weak vertical, or nearly 
vertical, fire. 
(Ships of war have at all times been exceedingly averse to taking up 
positions, or passing any place in which they were exposed to the fire 
of guns, even field guns, if stationed on heights overlooking them. 
Numerous instances could be mentioned). 
5. E, That there are, or may in future be, iron-clads so constructed 
