472 
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF 
horses at the rate of six miles an hour, and if six horses be used, they can 
travel ten miles an hour; whereas a gun which is mounted so as not to 
allow the artillerymen to ride upon its carriage, 1 2 will require at least two 
horses to draw it, two to an ammunition cart, four for its artillerymen to 
ride, and one for a person who is to hold the saddle-horses when the gun is 
inaction; which is five horses more than is required when the artillerymen 
ride upon the gun-carriage and are drawn by four horses, and three when 
six horses are used to draw the field-piece with four men riding upon the 
gun-carriage. This makes a difference in the first case of £321 Is. 3d. 
for one gun, and £1944 7s. 6d. for a brigade of six pieces; and in the 
second case, £194 8s. 9d. for one gun, and £1166 12s. 6d. for a brigade of 
six pieces per annum in favour of the new carriages, supposing Government 
to pay Is. lOd. per diem for each horse, including the driver, and for 
keeping each horse ]s. 5d. per diem for 245 days, and 2s. per diem for 
120 days, which was the price paid in the last German campaign.” 3 A 
discussion thus arose between the Duke and the Committee which lasted until 
1792. In that year war was virtually declared with Trance, 3 delay became no 
longer possible, and the Duke called upon the Committee for their ultimatum. 
Upon this the Committee forwarded to his Grace on the 19th August, 1792, 
the three following schemes, A, B, and C, which correspond closely, the first 
with the present English field battery system, 4 5 the second with the present 
English horse artillery system, and the third with the present Prussiau field 
battery system; the Committee strongly recommending the fast. “We 
cannot,” they said, “ but prefer upon every consideration the men being carried 
on the guns, as they are thereby attached solely to the use of them. We appre¬ 
hend much embarrassment in the case of the horses” (in the detachment 
system) “while the guns are firing. We would propose the artillerymen to 
be armed with pistol and pushing sword. We leave to your Grace whether 
the artillery soldier should not have the same security for his head and 
shoulders as a dragoon.” Some further correspondence ensued, and on the 
20th Dec. of the same year the Committee explained more fully their views 
as to the tactical use of the brigade. “ We conceive this brigade ought never 
to be stationary, and scarcely ever to act on the defensive . . . and in 
all rapid manoeuvres four horses only should be used, the third pair accom¬ 
panying as spare. . . . The artillerymen” (in A and C) “are to march 
on foot until the service requires them to advance with greater expedition.” 3 
The Duke lost little time in coming to a decision on the difficult and compli¬ 
cated question before him, and guided probably by the example of the Trench 
in the preceding year, he ordered two troops to be organised according to 
scheme i?, in January 1793. 6 
1 These carriages were of the same character as the galloper carriage, a sketch of which I gave 
in my last paper. 
2 Major Adye’s MS. Notes. 
3 First coalition against France, 26th June, 1792. 
4 The comparison of course only holds good in a general way, for the equipment and organisation 
of one division of a battery in the A scheme was entirely on the horse artillery system, Colonel 
Williams’ carriages affording no means of carrying gunners. 
5 Major Adye’s MS. Notes. 
6 “ Bei der Englischen Armee gab man den Kanonieren bei der Artillerie des Emigranten-Korps 
Fferde, urn sie nur einigermassen zweckmassig gebrauchen zu konnem ”—“ Ueber reilende 
Artillerie, &c.” p. 40. 
