THE EOYAL AETILLEEY INSTITUTION. 
235 
shell being necessarily inaccurate in its flight, it should theoretically “ be 
even more regular than an ordinary shot of the same weight.” 4 
First, then, as regards the Facts of the case: An immense number of 
references might be made to practice reports, and to the reports of the 
various Committees which have deliberated from time to time, to prove 
that the opinion as to the eccentricity of this projectile affecting injuriously 
its accuracy “has no foundation in fact;” the following, however, will 
perhaps be sufficient for this purpose. 
On the 5th October, 1852, Col. Robe reports to the Director General, 
“ The results as to deviation , range, and velocity have been most satisfactory. 
.... At 900 and 950 yds., 5 shell out of 6 went through the target, and the 
6th was 5 yds. to the left of the centre line .... At 1600 yds. 5 shells were 
fired and grazed at 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 yds. to the left of the line.” 5 At the 
foot of the same report Col, Robe writes “ The direction of these shells were 
remarkably good.” 6 
Again, the Committee report 18th April, 1853. “The results” as to 
direction , range and velocity were very satisfactory. 7 
On the 15th August 1853, Col. Lake, R.A. reports: “I beg to state 
that these shells appear to answer most effectually, and the direction 
was very exact .” 8 * Again on the 22nd August 1853, with reference to further 
experiments. Colonel Lake reported: “ I beg to observe that the direction 
is very good , fyc.” d On the 23rd September 1853, the same officer reports : 
“ The experimental practice with Captain RoxeEs Diaphragm shells being 
completed, I have the honour to inform you that they appear to me to be 
very effective.. . . The direction was good.” 1 ® On the 1st October 1853, the 
Committee report, “ With the Diaphragm Shrapnel shell.. .. the direction is 
good.” 11 * 
Such are a few of the many positive testimonies wdiich might be quoted 
to prove the accuracy of the practice which was made with these shells ; 13 
to which may be added, that the whole tenour of the reports of the 
Committee, 13 and the teaching of some fifty pages of practice reports 14 go 
4 Col. Boxer’s Remarks upon Committee's Memo, on Diaphragm Shrapnel Shell, p. 4. 
“In fact tine flight of these projectiles should be theoretically more accurate than ordinary round 
shot of the same weight, and I am quite satisfied that in practice it will be found quite as accurate.” 
Remarks on Diaphragm Shrapnel Shell , p. 23. 
5 Synopsis of Ordnance Select Committee's Deport on Shrapnel Shell, p. 276. 
6 Col. Boxer’s Remarks on Committee’s Memo, on Diaphropm Shrapnel Shell , p. 4. 
7 Synopsis of Ordnance Select Committee's Reports on Shrapnel Shell, p. 281. 
8 Ibid. p. 281. 9 Ibid p. 283. 10 Ibid p. 285. 11 Ibid p. 288. 
12 I might perhaps also quote a passage from a report of the late Sir George Barker, E.A. in 
positive proof of what I am seeking to establish; the passage is as follows : “ The objection referred 
to by Col. Abbott, that the centre of gravity is not in the centre of the figure, has been found by 
experiment not to affect the flight of the projectile to a perceptible degree.”— Supplement to 
Ordnance Select Committee Reports on Shells, p. 23. I do not, however, quote this passage in my 
text, for the reason that I cannot discover to what particular experiment Colonel Barker referred, 
and I think that I may very well afford to dispense with a piece of evidence which is not as 
precise as I wish all the evidence which I make use of to be. At the same time I give the passage 
in a note that it may not be supposed that I have overlooked it, and because it shows what this 
distinguished artillery officer thought upon the subject. 
13 See Synopsis &c., also Committee’s Memo, on Diaphragm Shrapnel Shell, pp. 3, 4, &c. 
14 Ibid. p. 9 to 58. 
[VOL. IV.] 31 
