6 
MINUTES OE PROCEEDINGS OF 
In the third place, it should be noticed that the adverse opinions expressed 
often appear to have been formed upon imperfect or incomplete data: when 
we are told that these shells frequently inflicted wounds of a trifling 
description, we do not learn at the same time the conditions under which 
they were employed, whether at long ranges, beyond those at which Shrapnel 
shell could be efficiently employed, (and it must be remembered that the 
efficient range of the Shrapnel of that time was much less than that of the 
Diaphragm Shrapnel shell, in consequence of the impossibility of using high 
charges with them without danger of premature explosion) ; whether they 
exploded at the proper distance from the object fired at, or what was their 
“final” velocity—we know nothing, in short, of the circumstances under 
which these opinions came to be formed, and as much ignorance prevails 
even at the present day on the theory and practice of Shrapnel fire, it is 
not wonderful if on their first introduction they were not perfectly un¬ 
derstood, and in consequence were sometimes improperly or injudiciously 
applied. 
Fourthly, it has always appeared to me that writers who depreciate what 
I may designate the physical value of the Shrapnel shell, frequently, if not 
invariably, fail to take sufficiently into account their moral effect. I believe 
the moral effect of Shrapnel to be extremely great; as I am sure any one 
who has stood by during practice with these projectiles, or has been in any 
way exposed to their fire, will testify. And with respect to the wounds being 
sometimes of a trifling description, and not always fatal—this argument 
might upon occasion be applied to every other description of missile ; more¬ 
over, if it could be shown, which I do not believe it can, that the Shrapnel 
wounds in the great majority of cases are not serious, I w r ould reply that in 
an engagement the quantity of the wounds inflicted is of more account than 
their quality; for in the first place, it is difficult to persuade men standing 
under a whistling shower of fragments that if they are hit they will not be 
materially injured ; in the second place, the sight of a large number of 
comrades becoming at least temporarily disabled will not tend to inspire 
confidence in those v 7 ho are not hit, for men in the heat of action are not 
apt to balance chances so nicely, or to consider over-much the nature and 
extent of the injuries which they are liable to receive, and for the most part 
they find a fire in which six men are w-ounded harder to stand against than 
one by vdnch two are killed; and, in the third place, it should never be 
forgotten that battles are decided, as has been well said, not by the number 
of men killed, but by the number frightened ! 
Much stress has also been laid by the opponents of the shell on the 
difficulty of judging correctly where the shell should be exploded; and 
though I believe that the force of this objection has been much over¬ 
estimated,* I am quite prepared to assign to it a place in an investigation of 
* By General Shrapnel, indeed, it was affirmed that Shrapnel Shell have an advantage over 
other projectiles in this respect. He says, “ The great advantage which pertains to spherical case 
shot over all other modes of firing is, that it is calculated and best adapted for unfixed distances and' 
ranges merely estimated, or which cannot be correctly ascertained; the reason of which is self- 
evident from its covering or spreading over so much ground, that one and the same elevation will 
answer for a considerable number of contiguous ranges .”—Ordnance Select Committee Report on 
