HL Deb 22 February 1876 vol 227 cc666-73
THE DUKE OF ST. ALBANS

, in rising to put the Question of which he had given Notice, with respect to alleged defects in the Martini-Henry rifle, said, he was afraid from all accounts that we were somewhat in the case of the epitaph—"I was well, I would be better—here I am." He was afraid we had exchanged a fairly good weapon in the Snider for the Martini-Henry, and that it had not realized the expectations formed of it. This was no Party question—it would be difficult, if one wished it, to know who to blame. The military authorities were relieved of the responsibility of choosing the arm they required by a Committee being appointed, and though the Government had been a long time in discovering the defects, yet their predecessors adopted the rifle. It was of the highest importance that the weapon supplied to the English Army should be the very best that could be procured, and it would doubtless be a vast disappointment to the country, after the large sums expended, if it was found that we had not a perfect arm; but it would be better to look this in the face, if it was not so, rather than leave our soldiers with a weapon in which they had no confidence. He hoped, however, that the reports he had heard would prove to be exaggerations. He spoke under contradiction from the illustrious Duke, and from the noble Earl the Under Secretary of State for War (Earl Cadogan), but he was told on good authority that between 60 and 70 of the Martini-Henry rifles had become unfit for service in a battalion of Guards alone during the last Autumn Manœuvres, and he believed complaints were received last year of the rifle from various foreign stations. But what was most important was the despatch of Lieutenant Hinxman, from Malay, describing the rifle in the first and only time it had as yet been used in action. He said— I "was much disappointed with the new rifles. When they got hot the extractor became jammed, and eight or 10 of my men told me their rifles were useless, so I told them to take the wounded men's rifles. Now, if the Martini-Henry was ineffective against foes, it seemed also to be somewhat dangerous to friends. It seemed that a small quantity of sand or dirt getting into the lock would make the pull a hair-trigger. It was not pleasant to know that the man standing behind one had a hair-trigger, but it was doubly unpleasant if one knew that it was not only a hair-trigger, but one which necessarily must stand at full-cock. Might he ask any of their Lordships what would be their feelings if they were asked to join a shooting party who were to go over rough ground and through fences, and who were carrying guns which only could stand at full-cock? From no wish to embarrass the Government, but as sharing the general anxiety which was felt on this important subject, he begged to ask. Whether any reports have been received during the past year with respect to defects in the Martini-Henry Rifle; and, if so, whether there is any objection to lay such Reports on the Table; and to state the steps (if any) which have been taken, and the estimated cost per rifle of rectifying the defects complained of?

EARL CADOGAN

, in reply, said, that reports had been received during the past year with reference to defects in the Martini-Henry rifle, and there was no objection to lay those Reports on the Table of the House. Among these complaints some referred to the sighting, some to irregularity of pull, others to the difficulty of extracting the emptied cartridges in certain cases, and, in isolated instances, to the weapon going off in the act of closing the lever. It was found also that the pull could be injured by a small amount of dust or dirt getting between the shoulder of the trigger and the trigger-plate, and that by the insertion of a piece of paper or other foreign substance, the trigger might be converted into a hair-trigger, and so the rifle might go off; unexpectedly and cause accident. No such accident had occurred at Enfield since the manufacture of those rifles was commenced there, though, of course, an immense number of rounds had been fired at Enfield with them. But the possibility of the occurrence had been deemed so serious that in October last a Conference of Officers had met to consider the matter, and, on the suggestion of the Superintendent of the Small Arms Factory, they came to the conclusion that a plan of counter-sinking the shoulder of the trigger and a slight additional improvement in the details of the manufacture of the weapon would afford a remedy for the danger. At a meeting of the Conference of the same officers in January it was recommended that the necessary alteration should be made in the weapon. This alteration would cost only 3s. for each rifle; it did not affect the principle, nor would it involve the return of the rifle into the factory. With regard to "half-cock"—which some persons considered a source of danger rather than of safety—the Conference, after much deliberation, did not recommend it. He had had a letter sent to him by Colonel Close, written by Lieutenant Abbott, whose name their Lordships would remember in connection with the murder of Mr. Birch, in which that officer said—"I wish my father to tell Colonel Close that the Martini rifle did very well." With respect to the extraction of the emptied cartridge, that was found to be the result of neglecting to extract the case immediately after firing, as, when the weapon cooled, the metal of the chamber contracted and held it fast; but by a new drill regulation, re- quiring the soldier to extract the spent cartridge after firing, that difficulty would be avoided. The Martini-Henry rifle had been chosen for the British Army, after a long and anxious deliberation, by what he thought he might fairly call representative Committees. A sum of £1,400,000 had been already spent on the manufacture of that arm and the ammunition necessary for it, and therefore it was most desirable to render the weapon perfect by remedying any deficiencies. The analogy sought to be drawn by the noble Duke from the epitaph he had repeated to their Lordships hardly existed in this case, because the dead man had called in the physician when he was perfectly well; whereas, as regarded the Martini rifle, it was found to be necessary from real defects to call in the physician. But if, as was believed by competent authorities, its defects could be remedied, he thought their Lordships would be disposed to think it was the duty of the Government to do their best to make it a complete success.

EARL GREY

concurred with the noble Earl who had just addressed their Lordships that after so much money had been expended on the Martini-Henry rifle, the Government ought to try and make it a satisfactory weapon; but he still more concurred with his noble Friend the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset) when he said we ought to look the matter in the face, and whatever we might have spent upon Martini-Henry rifles, we ought not to be afraid to ascertain whether they really were open to the objections urged against them. If they were, we were bound to give them up, and ought not to leave the British soldier with any but the best weapon. It was said that after a number of shots had been fired from the Martini-Henry rifle, the recoil was such as to interfere with the correctness of the aim. Information on this and other points in connection with the weapon would be very desirable for Parliament.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

said, he could repeat what had been said by his noble Friend the Under Secretary of State for War—that the introduction of the Martini-Henry rifle had not been undertaken hastily by the late Government. From 1866, when General Peel advertized for the best breech-loading weapon for the British Army, there had been almost incessant inquiries into this subject, and it was not until their conclusion that the Martini-Henry rifle had been adopted, with the full concurrence of the Commander-in-Chief, by the late Government. The reports of a large number of regiments, as to the performance of the Martini-Henry rifle, were highly satisfactory; and he believed it was stated on good authority that its recoil was not greater than that of the Snider and other rifles. As against the Report of Lieutenant Hinxman there was the unqualified approval of the naval officer of the expedition. As to the statement of his noble Friend (the Duke of St. Albans) that the military authorities were relieved of responsibility by the appointment of Committees, he differed from that view. The responsibility lay with the military authorities. As to the objection that there was no half-cock, to meet that it had been recommended that there should be a locking bolt, but the illustrious Duke did not think that desirable.

THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE

said, he thought it would be very difficult to adopt any view in opposition to that of the Committees, which had gone into all the details of this question and had seen the Martini-Henry rifle under all the advantages and disadvantages of actual trial—the results of course the military authorities could only take on their dictum. Under these circumstances, responsibility must rest on the Committees as to which was the best arm. Had he been a member of the Conference he thought he would have been in favour of recommending a half-cock. Being something of a sportsman, he knew something of the apprehension felt by those who were in the immediate neighbourhood of persons who were apt to carry their fowling-pieces on full-cock. He certainly did not think a bolt would do. He certainly should prefer an arm that had a half-cock, if it was possible to have one equally efficient with that arrangement, to the Martini-Henry without it. The theory was that breech-loading arms ought not to be loaded until they were about to be used, and therefore that not much danger need be incurred. Formerly, when individual men had not to make charges or rushes, there was not the same difficulty; but now, when a man was left so much to his individual action, there was more danger in intrusting him with a loaded musket on full-cock. But to gain so many advantages as are now sought for we must submit to certain disadvantages. No doubt there had been complaints of the Martini-Henry rifle going off in some cases without the trigger having been touched; but it was said that this might be completely prevented in the manufacture of the weapon. As to the recoil, he believed that the complaint of the objectionable amount of recoil had been caused by the butt having been made too long, which prevented the soldier from getting it up close to his shoulder. In all cases, whenever a new arm was adopted, it would be found necessary, after actual service, to make adjustments and improvements. There must be a trial of the weapon in actual service. Firing a number of shots at Enfield was a very different thing from giving the rifles to ordinary men to be knocked about. It must be remembered, too, that the capability of men to handle and take care of their weapons greatly differed, and that small mishaps were sure to occur. He was satisfied, however, that the arm was a good arm. As to the difficulty of extracting the emptied cartridges owing to the shrinking of the barrel, that showed how difficult it was to foresee all difficulties of detail. At first it had not been thought necessary to order in the drill regulations that spent cartridges should be extracted immediately after firing; but as such a regulation had since been made, that difficulty was not likely to occur again. With respect to the armitself, he thought it right to say that 100 different kinds of weapons were produced when it was first submitted to competition. A certain number of those were withdrawn by the manufacturers themselves; a certain number were set aside, the best were selected, and of these the Martini-Henry was finally adopted as the best shooting arm that could be had.

VISCOUNT CARDWELL

hoped their Lordships were not understood to be debating the question whether the British soldier ought to be armed with the best possible weapon:—at whatever the cost the British soldier should have that weapon. He hoped, also, that they were not debating as to who was responsible for the adoption of the Martini-Henry rifle. He shrank from no responsibility in con- nection with it. He hoped Her Majesty's Government would lay on the Table the results of the experiments which had been made within the last few months, that they might know whether this was—as he believed it to be—or was not the best weapon supplied to any army in Europe. He did not altogether agree with the illustrious Duke that the responsibility belonged to the Committee which had recommended it. As regarded the history of this rifle, in March, 1867, a most important and valuable Committee, consisting of some of the greatest rifle shots in the Kingdom and of some experienced soldiers, were appointed to inquire into the matter. They took a long time in their examination, and did not report till after he had come into office as Secretary for War, which he thought was an interval of two years from the time of their appointment. But the Government of which he was a Member did not act on the Report of that Committee. They assembled at the War Office some of the most experienced soldiers of this country. They recommended that 200 rifles should be made at Enfield and issued to the troops for trial. They were tried not only in this country, but in India, the Cape, and Canada. Well, when the reports came in the Committee was re-constituted, and Lord Elcho, who was Chairman of the Council of the Volunteers at Wimbledon, and the President of the Society of Civil Engineers were added to the Committee. The question was again considered by that Committee, who made their Report—again most favourable to the Martini-Henry. But the Government did not act on that Report. They assembled another body of most distinguished soldiers. This body again recommended the Martini-Henry rifle; it was approved by the Board of Admiralty; it had the high sanction of the illustrious Duke, and it was not until after all these things that it was adopted by the late Government. But it was not they only that had adopted it, any more than it was they who appointed the original Committee, because his right hon. Friend the present Secretary for War, he was told, went most carefully into an examination of the subject, and, having done so, largely increased the orders which the late Government had given for making them. He also took steps for issuing the rifle to the Infantry. But the real question was not the history of the case. The real question was the character of the arm. If the Martini-Henry was not the best, they were not justified in continuing it. He hoped that we should not rely upon the newspaper reports, of which the noble Earl on the cross-benches had spoken, inserted very likely by disappointed inventors; but that we should be put in possession of the official reports made by the School of Musketry at Hythe and the regiments which had tried it.

EARL CADOGAN

said, he had not troubled their Lordships with any remarks upon what he understood had been unanimously conceded—the great superiority of the Martini-Henry rifle as a weapon of precision. He could not promise to produce the Papers asked for by the noble Viscount (Viscount Cardwell) without consulting the Secretary of State for War, but he had no doubt he should be able to produce them. He might state generally that the Reports which had been received were of a most satisfactory character, and bore out the description of this arm as the best that could be produced.

House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter before Five o'clock.