2-piper --- I guess I misunderstood. In your first post you wrote:
"In the above chart two towers produced #10 shot larger than Tateham's @ 822/oz"
Thus I thought our friend Hammond could very well have been using the BIGGER ones which would have been very close to number 9 shot if he used the sources that had the bigger than 822/ ounce number 10 shot. Then that would have meant the pellets were BIGGER than the .070 diameter of the Tateham for #10..and as we all know #9 is .079 diameter so I was assuming it was LESS than 9 thousands of an inch difference between the Hammond recommended load diameter shot and a modern day #9... Bottom line---not much difference! But it appears there is more than just a little difference...so I retract and agree #10 even in 1890's seems awfully small.
Howover, as we have been directed by sxs, Hammond was not just saying "use small shot", he was clearly indicating he had excellent results using much HIGHER velocities than factory or most any one was using in tandem with small shot. ...Hammond isn't alone in that finding but I think the very HIGH velocity element perhaps keeps getting missed. er... Like some grouse
