THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION. 
359 
Considerable as these estimates may appear, the Committee are persuaded 
that the importance of every possible precaution before introducing rifled 
cast-iron guns, is such, that the experiments cannot be dispensed with; and 
that it is only by these or similar steps, that the question can be advanced to 
a practical solution. 
Should there be no Walker's guns on hand, or in delivery, the Committee 
suggest that they may be supplied by boring up one 32-pr. and one 18-pr. 
of the experimental guns of those calibres, bored in 68-pr. and 32-pr. blocks 
respective^, which are now in the Eoyal Arsenal, and are understood to have 
been intended for some departmental experiment on the shunt mode of 
rifling in 1858 or 1859. 
(Signed) J. St GEOEGE, 
President. 
[ 3 ] 
Committee Minute, No. 3927—8/ T . 
Eeport, No. 1640. 
Subject—Eifled cast-iron service guns. 
79 
With reference to W. O. letter of 26th March, 1861, b . 
304 
Committee's Report. 
3rd June, 1861. 
The Committee have given full and anxious consideration to the question 
referred to them by Lord Herbert, viz. to what service they would 
recommend the application of Mr B. Britten's rifled 32-pr. guns, designated 
No. 1 and A, in case they should stand the 1000 rounds, for which sanction 
was given in the letter from the War Office, dated 7th December, 1860, 
79 
b . Of these rounds, only 300 have, at present, been fired by each gun, 
304 
although shells have been delivered for firing 250 rounds more (500 shells). 
As it is taken for granted that a cast-iron rifled gun, which has fired 
1000 rounds, could not be issued for service, the Committee suppose the 
question put to them to be—“ Eor what services do they recommend the 
issue of cast-iron rifled guns, supposing the particular guns in question 
to have given this proof of endurance." 
2. In answering this question, the Committee assume that the intrinsic 
superiority of wrought-iron guns, as manufactured by Sir William Arm¬ 
strong, over cast-iron guns, is a fact which will be universally admitted. 
The almost immeasurable superiority of the former over the latter in point 
of strength and endurance has been placed beyond dispute ; and, although 
more liable perhaps to total destruction by the effect of a blow from an 
enemy's shot, this is a contingency of small practical moment; the general 
effect of any direct blow being to make a cast-iron gun also unserviceable, as 
is fully evinced by 56 cast-iron guns disabled in the siege of Sebastopol. 
The question then appears to turn chiefly on first cost, and facility of 
supply. 
