THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION 
5 
“En 1808, les shrapnels etaient employes contre les Frangais a la bataille 
de Yimiera et, snivant les Anglais, concourent beancoup au gain de cette 
premiere bataille livree dans la Peninsula, par Sir Arthur Wellesley .”— 
Experiences sur les Shrapnels. Avant-Propos. III. 
It would be easy to multiply authorities to prove that the effect produced 
by these shells at Yimiera, and subsequently throughout the Peninsula 
campaign, was very great; and to those who would wish to investigate the 
subject more at length I would recommend a perusal of Major SetoAs 
Observations on Shrapnel Shells ,* particularly chapters i. and iii. Major 
Seton is one of those who think the effect of Shrapnel very questionable, and 
that although on their first employment they seemed to have done good 
service, this service was rather apparent than real, the novelty of the 
projectile contributing in no small measure to increase the admiration with 
which it was first regarded, and to cause its effect to be exaggerated. Now, 
respecting this, and other, adverse opinions which have been expressed 
upon the subject, I must remark that no case against these shells seems 
to me to have been made out.f 
It appears to me, in the first place, on weighing the favourable against 
the unfavourable opinions, as collected and recorded by Major Seton, and 
some few others which I have met with elsewhere, that the balance is largely 
in favour of the shells; and this any reader who chooses to take the trouble 
may determine for himself by referring to Major SetoAs work. 
In the second place, it is certain that many of the adverse opinions prove 
upon investigation to be much less formidable than they at first sight appear. 
Por instance, when the Duke of Wellington states, as he did in 1812, that 
his opinion in regard to these shells had been much shaken, (Gurwood's 
Despatches , Yol. YIII., p. 659), he explains wherein he thinks the shells 
defective,-—“ that they inflict trifling wounds, and kill no body,”—and 
in the following month we find him, not proposing to discontinue the 
supply of the shells, but suggesting “ a remedy” for this “ material 
defect,” by the employment of larger bullets than those which had 
previously been placed in the projectile, (Gurwood's Despatches , Yol. IX., 
p. 281), a fact which in itself is strong proof that he thought the projectile 
only needed improvement to make it formidable. That this increase in 
the size of the bullets proved an effective remedy can hardly be doubted 
when we read the accounts given by the French of the effect which 
these projectiles produced when employed against them at St Sebastian 
in 1813. “Ces projectiles nous causerent beaucoup de mal;” “Nous 
ne pumes lutter longtemps contre une masse aussi formidable d'artil¬ 
leries” “Ce projectile, que Tennemie a trouve le moyen de faire eclater a 
volunte, nous fait beaucoup de mal,” ( Observations on Shrapnel Shell , pp. 
16, 17). Such are the terms in which these projectiles are spoken of by 
those who certainly did not want for opportunities of noticing their effects. 
* This work is in the Library of tbe Royal Artillery Institution. 
f The evidence brought forward on both sides by Major Seton embodies nearly all that it is 
necessary to adduce to arrive at a correct opinion upon the subject, and in this way may be 
considered as practically exhaustive. In dealing with Major Seton’s remarks, therefore, I shall 
virtually be dealing with the whole of the objections which have been urged against the Shrapnel 
shell by different writers. 
