THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION. 
289 
the quantity of ammunition likely to be required in action. Since it had 
been proposed to have a 16-pr. gun for field batteries, he had had much 
conversation with officers on the subject, and had found that opinions varied 
considerably with respect to the number of rounds which were practically 
requisite to be carried with each gun, and that there was a difficulty in 
finding good data to furnish as safe basis. If they adopted the 16-pr. he 
had understood that they could only carry into action 104 rounds against 
the 124 rounds which the 12-pr. carried, and this diminution was to his 
mind a serious consideration. On the table before them the 16-pr. was 
shown as carrying with it 112 rounds, which would be a loss of only 8 rounds 
as compared with the 12-pr., but he believed that 112 was rather an exces¬ 
sive estimate. He saw the Secretary of the Shell Gun Committee present; 
perhaps he could inform the meeting on the point. 
Captain W. E. Lluellyn, E.A., said the subject had not yet been worked 
out. 
Lieut.-Colonel Miller. —May I assume the number of rounds to be 104 ? 
Captain Lluellyn. —My impression is that the number of rounds will 
be 112, but the Committee have not yet decided. 
Lieut.-Colonel Miller said he would assume, for the sake of argument, 
that the number of rounds would be 104, which he thought more probable. 
That would involve a loss of 20 rounds, and the question was, would there 
be sufficient for a long day's work ? He might take it for granted that the 
amount of ammunition available was only that carried by the gun and one 
wagon; for the second line of wagons must be regarded as a reserve 
which could not be brought near the enemy, or at all events there would be 
such an uncertainty about its being at hand when wanted that it could not 
always be depended upon. Then came the question as to how many rounds 
were fired in one day's engagement. The experience of the Prussians in 
1866 had been often quoted on this point, but the evidence about its expen¬ 
diture was very incomplete. They had a valuable report from Colonel 
lieilly, E.A., who was sent out on that occasion by the Government, but the 
only absolute information he could give on this point related to the 2nd 
Prussian army, under the Crown Prince; whereas it was the 1st Army, under 
Prince Prederick Charles, that had had its artillery most severely engaged. 
At Kueniggratz it carried on a regular fire from seven in the morning until 
three in the afternoon. He could give them no detailed facts as .to the expen¬ 
diture of ammunition on that occasion; but a German writer, Colonel Eiistow, 
who received a great deal of credit on the continent as a military historian, 
said that during the day the field batteries had twice to be replenished from 
the reserves; and Captain Brackenbiny, who was with the Austrians, and 
who attended to give evidence before the Committee of Superior Officers 
of which Sir Eichard Dacres was President, when questioned as to the 
amount of ammunition expended, was unable to give tables or statistics, but 
stated that some of the guns fired away all their ammunition, and that he 
knew as a fact that some had fired about 157 rounds by twelve o'clock in 
the day. Colonel Eeilly's report contained a table showing that the highest 
expenditure in the 2nd Prussian Army under the Crown Prince at Kcenig- 
gratz, was by a battery of the Guard Artillery, which fired 81 rounds per gun; 
on which occasion, judging from the report of the Guards' movements, 
they probably opened fire about noon and ceased at about four o'clock, giving 
