OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 16 July 1868)

§ MR. H. B. SHERIDAN

rose to call attention to the Petition of Mr. Samuel Aspinwall Goddard, merchant and gun-maker of Birmingham [presented 24th April], stating his claims for inventions and improvements in the construction of breech-loading cannon. The hon. Member said, that some years ago the Government had challenged the inventive power of the country to solve the problem as to having breech-loading cannon; and Mr. Goddard was one of the earliest to come forward, and he succeeded in making a breech-loading cannon. The weapon was handed over to the Select Committee on Ordnance, that they might test its powers. The Members of that Committee made various suggestions, and the result was that Mr. Goddard manufactured several other breech-loading cannon and sent them to the Government; and at last he invented a gun which was said by the Government and by the Select Committee to be as perfect a gun as could at that time be found. Mr. Goddard thought that having found out what was wanted he was in a position to command the attention of the Government, He offered to the Government that they 1251 should take the gun to Shoeburyness and fire 500 rounds from it without cleaning, the only condition being that they should put a wet sponge down it. Mr. Goddard described the merits of his invention in the Petition, from which he would read the following passage:— This cannon was taken to Shoeburyness, General Cator, the president, and Colonel W. H. Pickering, the secretary, and other Members of the Select Committee attending, and that it was then and there loaded and fired 360 or 370 times successively without sponging or cleaning, and without any appliance whatever, not even the insertion of the wet sponge, as had been stipulated for. That these facts are in substance recorded in the Minutes of the Select Committee; that this cannon has met and satisfied the essential requirements of a breech-loading cannon; and that the qualities which it possesses are permanent and not transitory, and may be copied and extended to other cannon indefinitely. That General Cator, on the conclusion of the trial, declared that, the cannon worked well;' that neither he nor the other members of the Committee then present could see any fault in it, but that' all that be and the Committee could do was to commend it to the Government, which they would do.' That soon after this Report was sent in, petitioner was instructed by the War Department to get up a 32-pounder upon a similar construction, which was done, and the cannon was delivered at Woolwich, where it was proved, with three several charges of 18, 18, and 20 pounds of powder and ball, after which it was taken to Shoeburyness and loaded and fired many times, several times with 56 lb. oblong shot, without any obstruction arising and without exhibiting any defect. That this 32-pounder was mounted upon a carriage invented by petitioner, combining an inclined plane upon which the recoil took place, the force of which was retarded by strong india-rubber belts, which also drew it back into position, effecting the double object of preventing shock by recoil, and of placing the cannon in position, without the intervention of much, if any, manual labour, which plan of carriage, though it may not be brought literally into use, suggests valuable ideas to artillerists in Her Majesty's service, and these inventions have, as your petitioner believes, been to some extent applied. That Mr. Armstrong's cannon was accepted, and that of your petitioner put aside, the small one, which had been so successful, being placed in the Arsenal at Woolwich, where it remains at the present time. That after a large number of Armstrong cannon bad been manufactured, including 1,000 100-poundcrs, either finished or in process of manufacture, and a very large sum of money had been expended, and after they had proved defective in service in China or Japan, as was reported, Her Majesty's Secretary of War desired petitioner to go to Woolwich, and see if he could alter to his plan the 100-pounder Armstrong guns which were in preparation. That petitioner did go to Woolwich, and found that his breech-loading cannon, which had been lying at Woolwich, had been got out and put in order, and examined by the Select Committee of the Honourable Board of Ordnance, and your petitioner humbly represents that the request of the Minister of War to your petitioner 1252 to go to Woolwich and see if he could not alter the Armstrong gun to his plan, after such examination by the Select Committee had been made, was very conclusive evidence of its possessing substantial merits, and a very high compliment to his invention. That, in examining the butts prepared for the Armstrong 100-pounders, petitioner reported to the Select Committee that they could be finished on his plan, but would not be perfect guns, inasmuch as that they were, in his opinion, already weak where they should be strong, while the alteration would make them still weaker; but that there were at the Arsenal some 70-poundcr butts of a construction well adapted to the object. That the War Department accepted this Report, and requested petitioner to provide working drawings, and give such instructions to the Superintendent at Woolwich as would enable him to get up a 70-pounder on the proposed model. That petitioner considered such request in the nature of a command, and did provide the drawings, and attended with his machinist at Woolwich on several occasions to give instructions for getting up the cannon and to examine the execution of the work. That the difficulties which presented themselves at the outset in the construction of breech-loading cannon were, first, a mode of closing the breech; and, second, a mode of preventing the escape of gas upon the discharge, both of which are completely overcome in the cannon, produced by your petitioner; the former accomplished by two wedges acting in connection and nearly simultaneously, and the latter by an action to compensate for the stretching or expanding of the iron upon a discharge, in proof of the importance of which your petitioner has a written communication from the late Secretary of War, stating that the two inventions for effecting these objects were considered by the Department valuable. That petitioner has devoted to this invention some portion of valuable time during a period of fourteen years; that he has expended a sum of money which, with interest, amounts to more than £5,000; that he has placed in the possession of Her Majesty's Government most valuable inventions; and that he has had no expectation of profit or recompense from any other than Her Majesty's Government. The War Department continuing to refuse to make Mr. Goddard any remuneration for the £5,000 he had expended in what might be called the service of the Government, or for the valuable time he had given to perfecting breech-loading cannon, he applied for remuneration for the use of his invention in a gun called the "wedge-gun," which had been got up at Woolwich to supersede the Armstrong "hollow screw gun," whereupon Mr. Goddard was asked to go to Woolwich and examine that gun and point out definitely wherein his invention had been appropriated. Mr. Goddard accordingly did go to Woolwich and examine the wedge-gun, and found that the compensating bouche, or gas check, had been adopted without any change, and that the principle of the double wedge had been adopted with modifications. Several of 1253 Mr. Goddard's minor contrivances had also keen appropriated. In order not to be deceived by his own judgment in examining the wedge gun Mr. Goddard took with him to Woolwich a machinist of great practical ability to inspect the gun, and to make a report thereon, of which the following is a copy:— I, John Huggins, of Birmingham, machinist, at the request of Samuel Aspinwall Goddard, owner and proprietor of the breech-loading gun now lying at Woolwich Arsenal, and known by the name of the Church and Goddard gun, and of the inventions appertaining thereto, went to Woolwich to inspect the 64-pounder wedge-gun, permission having been obtained for that purpose, in order to ascertain in what respect, if any, it f embraced the inventions comprised in the said Church and Goddard gun, and having carefully examined the said 64-poundcr wedge-gun, make the following report, viz.:—1. I find that the sliding bouche or ring in the Goddard gun is adopted in the wedge-gun without any modification, with the exception that the bevil on the front interior of, the bouche is omitted, which bevil was not necessary to the invention, but was adopted simply as precautionary measure to insure the more certain action of the bouche. This mode of closing the breech, so as to prevent the escape of gas on discharge of the gun, I consider a most valuable invention, and I know of no other mechanical mode by which this indispensable object can be accomplished. 2. I find that the double wedge of the Goddard gun is applied to the wedge-gun, but in a modified form, and in my opinion in a greatly inferior form, inasmuch as that, among other disadvantages, its manipulation in the act of loading and filing would require double the time occupied by the Goddard gun in that performance; the principle, however, of the double wedge is fully adopted and applied. These two main features of, the Church and Goddard gun—viz., the compensating bouche and the double wedge—constitute the main features of the wedge-gun. The remainder of the Report was immaterial. That Report was sent to the Minister of War, who had, however, declined, or rather neglected, to make any compensation to him for the trouble and expense to which he had been put in aiding the Government in their endeavour to perfect a breech-loading cannon. Mr. Goddard said that the grounds for refusal by the War Department to make him any compensation were, first, that he had no legal claim; secondly, that much money had been expended over another breech-loading cannon with an unsatisfactory result; thirdly, that there was no immediate necessity for breech-loading cannon; fourthly, probably that his did not meet every requirement. With respect to the first of these grounds, Mr. Goddard submitted that claims in equity might be as strong as claims in law; with respect to the second and third, that he ought not to suffer be- 1254 cause other inventions had failed; that although there might be no immediate occasion for a perfect breech-loading cannon, yet that all the reasons in favour of a breech-loading cannon which induced Her Majesty's Government to spend a large sum of money in producing them still remained in full force, and that the time might come when the want of them might be urgent, perhaps indispensable. While, with respect to the fourth, it might be said that if his gun was not perfect, it was either the first or second best that had been offered to the Government. No doubt the War Department was much troubled with useless inventions; but in the present instance a really valuable invention had been offered to them and had undoubtedly received their approbation. The Government should treat inventors like Mr. Goddard with liberality, in the same way as they had done inventors of small-arms.