200 
FIELD ARTILLERY FIRE. 
officers to remove the tangent scales and make the gun-layers lay over 
their fingers as described above. 
For the sake of experience all case shot practice should be at a run¬ 
ning target. 
Common shell . As has been stated, our forged steel common shell 
breaks up into but three or four pieces, the chances of these doing 
much damage to personnel is comparatively slight and it cannot be 
looked upon as a man-killing projectile. Its value therefore consists in 
its comparatively large bursting charge. The chief merit of this is 
that it gives a large cloud of smoke on bursting and also has a certain 
amount of local destructive effect on cover. The first point is one of 
great utility during the important process of ranging, but two much 
weight must not be attached to the second. The destructive power of 
any common shell fired from a field gun (this does not include, of 
course, field howitzers and mortars) upon field works, even of a light 
description, is very small and quite disproportionate to the amount of 
time and ammunition expended. Indeed the reduced proportion of 
common shell carried by our batteries renders any large expenditure of 
that projectile for this purpose quite out of the question, and the 
French have gone still further, in altogether banishing 1 the powder- 
loaded common shell from their field batteries. As regards the des¬ 
truction of cover such as houses, the comparatively large bursting 
charge is likely to set them on fire, which is undesirable if we want to 
drive out the enemy with a view to occupying them ourselves, and the 
want of man-killing effect would enable the enemy to withdraw with 
but little loss. For this purpose a percussion shrapnel, or, if we had 
it, a ring shell, is much preferable. 
It is a very common error, inculcated by the older text-books, to 
suppose that when engaging artillery, common shell should be used 
with the hope of destroying the guns themselves. It is quite true that 
in the campaign of 1870 the Germans produced very good effects 
against artillery with common shell, or rather ring shell, but the 
silencing of the enemy’s guns was not produced by the destruction of 
his materiel but by the disablement of his personnel , a result which 
would have been brought about the sooner by the use of shrapnel 
shell, had the Germans been provided with an efficient pattern of that 
projectile. The following extracts will prove the truth of this asser¬ 
tion. 
Speaking on the same subject Prince Kraft says : 
“ In the great battle of Koniggratz (1866) we captured nearly 200 
guns; not one in the whole number, as far as I know, had been injured 
by fire .... With respect to all the many guns which were lost, 
the reports of the victorious infantry declare that they in general 
captured only such guns as had lost their teams by fire, the others 
succeeded in escaping.” 
General Sheridan at Gravelotte speaking of the silence of the French 
artillery after the artillery duel at that end of the field says : 
| | a Their artillery was silent however; and from this fact the German 
artillery officers grew jubilant, confidently asserting that their Krupp 
guns had dismounted the French batteries and knocked their mitrail- 
