505 
ON THE OUESTION WHETHER ANY DEVELOPMENT OE THE MATERIEL OE 
FIELD ARTILLERY IS NECESSITATED BY THE GENERAL ADOPTION OE 
ENTRENCHMENTS ON THE FIELD OE BATTLE; AND IE SO, ON THE 
DIRECTION SUCH DEVELOPMENT SHOULD TAKE, 
LIEUT. F. M, GOOLD-ADAMS, R.A. 
{The JR.A. Institution Gold Medal Prize J Essay, 1879.) 
“Manibus victoria dextris.” 
1. Colonel (now General) Hamley, in his “ Operations of War/' qompara- 
comes to the conclusion that the effect of the smooth-bore field gun of ||||^^ 
former days on the field of battle was greater in comparison with that of rifled ar- 
of the infantry arm then used than is the effect produced by rifled 1 ery ‘ 
guns relatively to that of the breech-loading rifle. He gives the fol¬ 
lowing reasons, viz. 
(1) The power of infantry fire has developed to a much greater 
extent than has that of artillery at close range. 
(2) The opportunities of effective artillery fire have diminished as 
range and accuracy (i.e. of the rifle) have increased. 
There can be no doubt as to the soundness of these arguments, at 
any rate until the introduction of our present field ordnance. No one 
can read the campaigns of Napoleon I. without recognising the decisive 
effects produced by artillery on the field of battle—as at Eylau, 
Friedland, and Aspern • but he will also be struck by the wholesale 
manner in which it always fell into the hands of a victor on account 
of its want of mobility. We may say, then, that artillery is not so 
powerful comparatively as it used to be. 
2, The questions at once arise -How has this change come about ? causes of 
How can it be remedied ? These questions we propose in this paper and 
to discuss, as the answers will enable us to form some idea as to what the ques- 
the artillery of the future should be able to do. At the same time, we answered^ 6 
must remember that although Colonel Hamley^s deduction as to the 
comparative effect of the two arms, artillery and infantry, may be true, not im- 
the necessity for a powerful force of artillery has become of more 
essential importance than ever. The very fact that infantry fire has 
become so powerful that a direct attack on infantry in a good position 
is impossible without the co-operation of artillery, whereas in former 
times such was not the case, has rendered the presence of artillery on 
the field of battle a matter of more absolute necessity. Moreover, it 
65 
