I would like to post the text of Reilly's letter to "The Field" published 26 Dec 1857 here because it has a lot to do with the history of pin-fires in UK. The text was sent by "The Field" to Vic Venters...who forwarded it to me. My comments on it can be read on the Reilly line. I'll post the original and then a typewritten version for easier understanding (If "The Field" objects, and I don't anticipate this), I'll delete.

[Linked Image from jpgbox.com]
[Linked Image from jpgbox.com]

The Breech Loader

Sir, - Your correspondents writing against breech-loaders all show by their own letters how little they really understand the principles upon which these guns are made.

This system differs from other novelties inasmuch as it has been extant about a quarter of a century and it has been in operation in some sporting circles these twenty years. All the patents have long ago fallen in; anybody who does not object to the expense of the necessary tools and machinery, and who can teach his workmen, may set to work and make these guns. The great facts of safety and durability have been fully established by the wear and tear of a long period than a good fowling piece is generally supposed to continue serviceable in hard shooting; and the breech-loader, which requires less care in cleaning, etc., exhibits less appearance of deterioration than the capper cap-gun after the same length of time in hard wear.

The only objections worth of any notice that have been adduced are those imperfections known to exist in the very worst specimens – the cheap Belgian and French guns, many of which kill very well, and last a fair time, inferior as they may be. The objection upon which such stress is laid – the relative sizes of the bore of the barrels, the interior of the cartridge – has had ample consideration ere this; and it does not necessarily follow, if errors have been made in early attempts, that they are to be continued. The point at issue with the few experienced London makers is not simply whether the bore of the barrels should be the same size as the wadding used in loading the cartridges, but as to whether the bore should be a size smaller to fit the wadding still tighter. It is obvious, if the calibre of the barrels be larger, the charge passes through them too freely, and there will not be sufficient friction to give strength to the shooting; on the other hand, by making the gauge of barrels to small, recoil will be increased; and the shooting, though excessively strong, may not be regular and close. The happy medium has to be arrived at; and this may be most effectually done in the trials before finishing, which guns of every construction turned out by any careful maker should be submitted.

Very few of the barrels for breech-loaders actually made in this country have been chambered with an abrupt termination, or shoulder, to meet the inner end of the cartridge-case; almost every one has been eased off at a moderate angle. Cutting or reducing the length of cartridge-cases is a waste of time; it is better to fill up with waddings. When using light charges, a thick felt wad over the powder, and a thin wad over the shot (both ungreased), and the closing tool then used to turn over the edge, the charge will be held sufficiently tight without any gum or cement, if the cartridges are taken out in a proper kind of carrier; but if it is intended to knock them about in the pocket, or if it is likely one may walk about for an hour without getting a shot, the wadding must be fastened in more securely. Nr. 15 (16 and 14) cartridges will only contain 3 or 3 ½ drams if powder and 1 1/4 oz. of shot with thin wads (in fact barely so much; No. 12 loaded with the same quantities, fills up well with a thick felt wadding over the powder. Under any circumstances there is no necessity for cutting cartridges shorter than they are made.

Some of the arguments which the opponents of the breech-loading system bring forward against its soundness and stability might have been received ten or fifteen years ago, when the originality of the design and curious simplicity of the construction rather took us by surprise. It had not then been so undoubtedly proved, as by the long experience we have had since in extensive and constant use, that the solid flat false breech which the breech ends of the barrels close against is as sound, as durable, and for all purposes of resistance of the charge, as secure and perfect as a breech permanently screwed into the tubes themselves; and they undergo the same proof as muzzle-loaders.

The explosion of this charge in the breech does not cause such a severe strain upon the mechanism holding the barrels in position as may at first be supposed; the expansive force finds the point of the least resistance, upon which it unites all its efforts; therefore it is an ounce of shot and the air to be displaced from the barrel, opposed to the whole weight of the piece. No other gun can possibly concentrate so fully all the force of the powder up in its charge of shot, nor so completely in the rifle give the spiral motion to the bullet.

Doubtless the facility with which the barrels can be reloaded, the breech ends held up to view, and a clear sight obtained through the bore, exposing this entire action in a manner so much at variance with previously-conceived ideas, has been and must continue to be a cause of distrust until actual proof and frequent trials reconcile one to these peculiarities. It may require the attestation of intimate friends ocular demonstration in the field and something beyond the recommendations of the manufacturer to carry conviction to the minds of sportsmen, upon a matter without precedent to guide their judgement, and on which they have been left so thoroughly in the dark. Until quite recently purchases were made from sheer curiousity, in the most disbelieving spirit as to their utility, but admitting the ingenuity and apparent goodness of this workmanship. The desire was to possess something new, taking its merits upon trust; and it has often been, with no less surprise than gratification that all doubts were dispelled, and the new gun found to be more agreeable to use and possessed of greater power than those on the old plan.

Practical experience, beyond our most sanguine expectations, gives the palm to these breech-loaders for carrying their shot both close and strong. Estimating their powers by the French and Belgian guns that have passed through out hands many years ago, we thought they would be covert guns for short distances; but it soon became apparent with superior workmanship and finer qualities of metal for the barrels, that extraordinary shooting powers might be achieved with the breech-loader; so that they not only came up to, but surpassed the ordinary fowling-piece, and delivered their shot closer and stronger than any other gun we have ever made. Of testimony to this effect we have abundance, some of which is conveyed to us per letter may be referred to. It is to actual and continued experience we should give our confidence not to vague surmises and unfounded theoretical deductions.

Everything that disturbs existing interests is due to meet with opposition at its early introduction; the difficulties it has to encounter are some proof of its value, should it survive. There must be intrinsic merit and sterling worth in this particular system of breech-loader, otherwise it could never have made good its way under such adverse circumstances as it has had to contend against. There have been good grounds for prejudices for it has has been badly made, though richly ornamented and, in fact has not been properly understood by the manufacturers until of late years... Moreover, there has been until recently considerable difficulty about obtaining an ample supply of cartridge-cases, and no one knows better than myself the persuasion it required to induce our apathetic English to undertake their manufacture, although a model was put into their hands that they had only to follow a pattern without the least exercise of the inventive faculty.

. . New Oxford-street, Dec. 15 . . . . .E.M. Reilly

Last edited by Argo44; 03/17/21 12:07 AM.

Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch