GOLD MEDAL PEIZE ESSAY, 1879 . 
511 
there are some remarks on field guns well worthy of attention, and 
which display a foresight and acquaintance with the requirements of 
artillery fit to take its proper position in action which must do infinite 
credit to the writer. 
He first quotes Prince Hohenlohe, where the latter says, ff We 
should not fire at masses of troops beyond 3000 paces (2,500 yds.), 
nor approach unbroken infantry within 800." The writer of the article 
then says, “ Is this to be taken as absolute ? Cannot we advance a 
step or two beyond these restrictive rules ? Cannot we get guns 
which will range further without such a high curvature of the shells' 
path ? Cannot we estimate distances accurately at long range, and 
find a powder more proof against the influence of the weather than 
that of the Prussians ?" (This question arose from Prince Hohenlohe 
saying that the weather had such an effect on the Prussian powder). 
“ At short ranges, cannot we manage to protect the gunners a little 
and the horses entirely against infantry fire in action, so that there 
may be no more talk of artillery always running away from men 
armed with an inferior weapon ? Cannot we devise projectiles more 
deadly at close range than common case shot ?" The writer then answers 
these questions, to a certain extent, himself, by saying that what 
tacticians want are, long-range guns with a flat trajectory and high 
velocity , simple and good range-finders, good powder of uniform quality, 
accurate range-tables, and some protection to men aud horses. 
These considerations to a great extent determine the requirements 
of the Field Artillery of the Future. With regard to protection 
for men and horses, the ground will often afford some; often, how¬ 
ever, it will not, and never will cover thus afforded compete with 
that to be obtained from movable bullet-proof screens, as proposed by 
Colonel Brackenbury. The adoption of some good pattern, combined 
with greatly increased power, of gun will quite revolutionise artillery 
tactics. A great protection, too, lies in great destructive power on 
the part of the gun: the more powerful it is, the quicker will the 
enemy be checked and his fire subdued. It is evident that a very 
powerful gun will beat off an attack to which a less powerful one 
would have succumbed, and would repulse an attack which would have 
failed even against a less powerful weapon, in less time, with more 
loss to the enemy and less to itself. 
14. Consequently, with a more powerful weapon, offensive action at gesou of f 
closer range is attended with less risk and with a greater chance of a power, 
successful issue. 
15. The fact is that until we possess weapons of such power 
shell and flatness of trajectory that a large per-centage of rounds at great 
moderate ranges are effective, even when those ranges are uncertain power ‘ 
and vary, until then we shall not produce effects commensurate with 
the complication, expense, and difficulty of transport which an artillery 
force entails. We can only produce these effects by the shells, when 
burst, covering a very large depth of dangerous ground, and so 
neutralising, to a certain extent, errors in the estimation of range, in 
