§ LORD ELCHOsaid, he rose to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, Whether the War Department intend to spend the Money recently voted by Parliament for Small Arms in the continued manufacture of the three-grooved service Enfield Rifle, of which upwards of 100,000 have been made since it was reported by the Ordnance Select Committee, on the 26th November, 1862, as being inferior to the oval-bore Rifle, "1stly, as regards precision when clean; 2ndly, as regards precision when foul; 3rdly, as regards non-tendency to accumulate fouling; and 4thly, as regards simplicity of management;" whether there is any reason to doubt the general correctness of the statement made by the Ordnance Select Committee that the oval-bore Rifle might be adopted into the service "without necessitating any increase to the present cost of supply;" whether it is the case that the oval-bore Rifle has been for many years one of the pattern arms of the service, and is the weapon with which the Engineers of the Regular and Volunteer Forces are now armed; and whether it is the intention of the War Department to institute further competitive trials of large or small-bore, muzzle, or breech-loading Rifles; whether pending the result of such trials, supposing them to he instituted, the manufacture of the three-grooved Enfield Rifle will be continued, and within what period of time it may reasonably be anticipated that a decision will be come to as to the pattern small arm to be adopted into the service for the future use of Her Majesty's Forces?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, in reply, that it was intended to continue the manufacture of the three-grooved service Enfield Rifle until it had been decided by the Secretary of State what weapon was to be employed in the service for the future. He had said last year, as well as the other day, that immediately after the Report of the Committee on Small Arms had been received it had been decided to reduce the manufacture of the Enfield to the lowest possible limit consistent with the supply rendered necessary from the wear and tear of the weapons now in use. From the 1st of April, 1863, 457 to the 1st of April, 1864, the manufacture of small arms at Enfield numbered only 54,000, and out of that number not above 40.000 were of the three-grooved long Enfield pattern. The production at the present time was only 1,000 per week of all kinds, and of that number under 700 were of the three-grooved long Enfield pattern. He had stated the other evening, and he had nothing to add to that statement now, that it was not intended to give up the production of the present service rifle until the merits of the Whitworth large-bore rifle had been fully tested. With regard to the second portion of the question asked by the noble Lord, he believed the fact was that the machinery at present employed in the manufacture of small arms could with a small expenditure be adapted to the manufacture of the Lancaster Rifle. To this expenditure, however, would have to be added the cost of the royalty. The Lancaster system of rifling had been used for several years in the carbines supplied to the Engineers. It was not the intention of the War Department at the present moment to institute any further competitive trials of small arms. It was, however, by no means impossible that a special trial between the Whitworth and the Lancaster rifles might not have to be made, but he hoped that no long time would elapse before a final decision could be come to upon the subject.
COLONEL KNOXsaid, he would beg to ask the noble Lord, Whether it is the intention of the Government to adapt the breech-loading system to the Enfield Rifle?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that 2,000 breech-loaders had been ordered for trial in different parts of the world, but no experiment would be tried as to the feasibility of adapting the breech-loading system to the service Enfields until reports had been received as to the value of a breech-loading arm as a military weapon.