introduction of iron shot, the use of trunnions for elevating, and the

standardization of calibres, for the French artillery of Charles VIII, who in 1495 descended on Italy. [67] Favé. [68] Lieut.-Col. Hime, R.A.: _The Progress of Field Artillery_. [69] Owen: _Lectures on Artillery_. [70] Whewell: _History of the Inductive Sciences_. [71] _Encycl. Brit._, 11th Edition. [72] This project, however, is mentioned of an engine called by him “a semi-omnipotent engine,” the subject of the 98th invention: “an engine so contrived, that working the _Primum mobile_ forward or backward, upward or downward, circularly or cornerwise, to and fro, straight, upright or downright, yet the pretended operation continueth and advanceth, none of the motions above-mentioned hindering, much less stopping the other.” This engine is obviously not the same as that described as the sixty-eighth invention. [73] A well-known story, quoted at length in the Memoirs of Sir John Barrow, connected de Caus with the Marquis of Worcester in dramatic fashion. The Marquis was being conducted through the prison of the Bicêtre in Paris when his attention was attracted by the screams of an old madman who had made a wonderful discovery of the power of steam, and who had so importuned Cardinal Richelieu that he had been incarcerated as a nuisance. “This person,” said the insolvent Lord Worcester after conversing with him, “is no madman; and in my country, instead of shutting him up, they would heap riches upon him. In this prison you have buried the greatest genius of your age.” The fable, and its exposure by a French writer, M. Figuier, are described in Dirck’s book. [74] Millington: _Natural Philosophy_. [75] Sir E. D. Lawrence: _Steam in Relation to Cornwall_. [76] Enouf: _Papin, sa vie et son œuvre_. [77] On the evidence of a picture purporting to represent the first Newcomen engine, in which mechanisms are shown for operating the cocks automatically, an attempt has been made to prove that the manipulated cocks were a figment and the story of Humphrey Potter a myth. The iconoclast has not been successful. The evidence that the first engines were hand-controlled is very general (see Galloway’s _Steam Engine and Its Inventors_). [78] At this time the corpuscular theory of heat still held the field. “Caloric,” or the matter of heat, was supposed to be a substance which could be imparted to or abstracted from a body, which had the property of augmenting its bulk, but not its weight, by setting its particles at a greater or less distance from one another. [79] _Encycl. Brit._, Eleventh Edition. [80] A text-book published a few years before Robins’ birth (Binnings’ _Light to the Art of Gunnery_, 1689) told how a certain profane and godless gunner, Cornelius Slime, was carried off by the devil before the eyes of the astonished onlookers! [81] Whewell: _Hist. of the Inductive Sciences_. [82] Dr. Halley: _Phil. Trans._, 1686. [83] How strange and almost incredible this phenomenon appeared to people long after Robins’ time, may be seen from the manner in which Ezekiel Baker, one of the principal London gunmakers and the contractor who supplied the rifles with which the Rifle Brigade was equipped in the year 1800, poured gentle sarcasm on the account of this experiment. In his book on _Rifle Guns_, published in 1825, he can only assign the cause of the deflection to “some peculiar enchantment in the air.” “Or,” he continues, “with all my practice I have yet much to learn in guns, and the effects of powder and wind upon the ball in its flight.” [84] Of the superstitious awe with which an iron field-piece was regarded by the highlanders in ’45, and of its small material value in the field, a note will be found in the appendices to Scott’s _Waverley_. [85] Mr. Patrick Miller, who is mentioned in a later chapter as builder of the first successful steam-propelled vessel, was also an enthusiastic artillerist. In a memorandum to the Select Committee of the House of Commons, appointed in 1824 to consider the claims of various inventors of steam-vessels, a Mr. Taylor gave the following evidence: “I found him (Mr. Miller) a gentleman of great patriotism, generosity, and philanthropy; and at the same time of a very speculative turn of mind. Before I knew him (1785) he had gone through a very long and expensive course of experiments upon artillery of which the carronade was the result.” [86] On April 20th, 1669, Mr. Pepys recorded in his diary a visit to “the Old Artillery-ground near the Spitalfields” to see a new gun “which, from the shortness and bigness, they do call Punchinello.” Tried against a gun of double its own length, weight, and powder-charge, Punchinello shot truer to a mark and was easier to manage and had no greater recoil--to the great regret of the old gunners and officers of the ordnance that were there. The gallant inventor offered Mr. Pepys a share in the profits; there seemed great promise that the king would favour it for naval use. “And,” adds Pepys, “no doubt but it will be of profit to merchantmen and others to have guns of the same form at half the charge.” [87] James: _Naval History_. [88] The carrying of _sham_ guns among their armament was not unknown in the case of vessels which boasted a reputation for their superior speed and sailing qualities (vide _Bentham Papers_). [89] Captain Simmons, R.A. [90] The carriage thus formed out of a baulk or trunk appears to have been known as a trunk carriage. Norton describes the cannon-periers as being mounted on “trunk carriages provided with four trucks.” [91] Oppenheim. [92] It was evidently a practice at this period to vary the diameter of the trucks to suit the ship’s structure and the height of the gun-ports. “Be careful,” says Bourne in 1587, “that the trucks be not too high, for if the trucks be too high, then it will keep the carriage that it will not go close against the ship’s side.... And the truck being very high, it is not a small thing under a truck that will stay it, etc. etc. And also, if that the truck be too high, it will cause the piece to have the greater reverse or recoil. Therefore, the lower that the trucks be, it is the better.” Bourne also mentions, in the same book, the _Art of Shooting in Great Ordnance_, as a curious invention of a “high Dutchman” a gun mounting so devised as to allow the piece to rotate through 180° about its trunnions for loading. [93] Manwayring: _Sea-Man’s Dictionary_. [94] Oppenheim. [95] Hutchinson: _Naval Architecture_. [96] In the margin of the copy of _The Art of Gunnery_, Thos. Smith, A.D. 1600, in the library of the R.U.S.I. in Whitehall, is the following note, written in legible seventeenth-century script: “Some make a device to discharge at a distance by a long string, fixed to a device like a cock for a gun with a flint or like a musket cock with a match.” In the same work are instructions as to firing in a wind, when the train of powder might be blown from the vent before the linstock could be applied. The gunner was to form a clay rampart, a sort of tinker’s dam, on the metal of the piece on the windward side of the touch-hole. [97] On this Sir John Laughton remarked: “The exercise, so born, continued as long as the old men-of-war and the old guns--‘Ships passing on opposite tacks; three rounds of quick firing’” (_Barham Papers_, N.R. Soc.). [98] A form of sight for use with ordnance was described by Nathaniel Nye, in his _Art of Gunnery_, of 1674. It consisted of a lute-string and a movable bead, with a scale opposite the latter graduated in degrees and inches. [99] In Lloyd and Hadcock’s _Artillery_ an extract from a letter written in 1801 by Lord Nelson relative to a proposal to use gun-sights at sea is given. The letter is unfavourable to the invention on the ground that, as ships should always be at such close quarters with their enemies that missing becomes impossible, such appliances would be superfluous. But in this connection the observation is made that, with the degree of accuracy of guns up to the nineteenth century a rough “line of metal” aim was probably all that was justified, in the matter of sighting. In other words, with one element of the system (the gun) so very inaccurate, nothing was to be gained by increasing the accuracy of another element (the sight) to a disproportionate degree. With increasing accuracy of the gun, increasing accuracy of sight was called for. [100] In Vol. IV of the _Proceedings of the Royal Artillery Institution_, in an article by General Lefroy, an order is quoted showing that trials were made of firing shells horizontally by the Royal Artillery in Canada in 1776. The author also shows that the trials made by the French in 1784-6 were brought to the notice of Lord Nelson. In Vol. V is the following extract: “Experiments were made on Acton Common in 1760, to fire coehorn and royal shells from 12-and 24-pounders, in order to be applied to the sea service; but as the shells were found frequently to burst in the guns, it was thought too hazardous to introduce them on board ships of war.” [101] The first public demonstration was given by Lieut. Shrapnel, R.A., before the G.O.C., Gibraltar, in the year 1787. [102] Simmons: _Effect of Heavy Ordnance_, 1837. [103] James: _Naval History_. [104] A short review of both books is given in the _Papers on Naval Architecture_, edited by Morgan and Creuze, 1829. [105] See Hugo’s _Toilers of the Sea_. [106] “As for guns,” wrote Fuller in his _Worthies of England_, comparing the relative merits of the inventions of printing and gunpowder, “it cannot be denied, that though most behold them as instruments of cruelty; partly, because subjecting valour to chance; partly, because guns give no quarter (which the sword sometimes doth); yet it will appear that, since their invention, Victory hath not stood so long a neuter, and hath been determined with the loss of fewer lives.” [107] At a later date this reduction in number of types of ordnance was extended to cover land artillery. In ’62 the French brought down the number of different calibres to four: one for the field, one for the siege, and two (the 30-and 50-pounders) for the navy. [108] Dahlgren: _Shells and Shell-Guns_, 1856. [109] By this time Denmark, Holland, Russia and Sweden had all recognized the possibilities of shell guns, and had adopted them in greater or less degree. By this time, too, France actually possessed more steam war-vessels than we had ourselves. [110] Simmons: _Effects of Heavy Ordnance_. [111] The crossbow was looked upon as a weapon unworthy of a brave man; a prejudice which afterwards prevailed with respect to fire-arms (Hallam: _Middle Ages_). [112] The Hon. T. F. Fremantle: _The Book of the Rifle_. [113] _Le Développement des Armes à Feu_, 1870. [114] In this aspect of the origin of the grooves there is a curious analogy between the rifle-barrel and the drill used in machine tools. In the primitive drill the shank is appreciably less in diameter than the hole cut by the drill, so that the drillings can easily work their way out of the hole. When, however, it was desired to make the shank almost of the same diameter as the hole, so as to form a guide, it was necessary to flute it with two grooves or more to allow the drillings to get away. In the course of its evolution these grooves became spiral. [115] Quoted in _The Book of the Rifle_ from Schmidt’s _Armes à Feu Portatives_, 1889. [116] Delvigne: _Notice historique des armes rayées_. [117] Beaufoy: _Scloppetaria_. [118] A paragraph in Beaufoy’s _Scloppetaria_ (1808) shows the complete misconception under which its author laboured as to the function of rifling. Just as the air turns a windmill or a shuttlecock (he says), so, after an indented ball quits its rifled barrel the air, forced spirally along its grooves, will cause the ball to turn. In short, he regarded the spiral grooves of a barrel as being of no further utility, with respect to the generating of the rotary motion, than as an easy way of giving the ball the requisite indentations. [119] Fremantle: _The Book of the Rifle_. [120] Captain A. Walker: _The Rifle_, 1864. [121] At the beginning of the century Ezekiel Baker had noted that “a wadding in the shape of an acorn cup placed on the powder, and the ball put on the top of the cup, will expand the cup and fill the bore--and of course the windage will be much diminished.” [122] Mention must be made of an important prior development of the elongated bullet which had been carried out by General Jacob in India, quite independently of French research. General Jacob conducted, in an altogether scientific manner, experiments the successful results of which were communicated by him to the home government on more than one occasion. The importance of his discoveries remained unrecognized, and the value of his improvements was lost to this country. [123] In military circles the possibilities of the invasion of this country had for some time been under discussion, in view of the increasingly aggressive temper of the French. Interest in national defence became general with the warning letter of the Duke of Wellington which appeared in _The Times_ on the 9th January, 1847. In ’51 was held the Great Exhibition, and for a time opinion was less agitated. The Exhibition, it was thought and hoped by numbers of people, would inaugurate the millennium. [124] This advantage of the rifled gun hod been fully appreciated by Captain Norton. As early as 1832 he had conducted trials with one-pounder rifled cannon, to confirm his belief that the projectile would maintain its rotation during flight and hit the target point-first (_Journal of R.U.S.I._, 1837). [125] Commander R. A. E. Scott, R.N.: _Journal of R.U.S.I._, Vol. VI, 1862. [126] Tennant: _The Story of the Guns_. This book gives in detail the controversy which arose between the advocates of the Armstrong and the Whitworth systems. [127] _Edinburgh Review_, 1859. Quoted by Sir E. Tennant. [128] The sudden and extraordinary development of rifled ordnance which now took place had a revolutionary effect not only on naval architecture and gunnery but on land fortification. In ’59 Sir William Armstrong, giving evidence before a committee appointed by the War Secretary, stated that he could attain with a specially constructed gun a range of five miles. The statement made a sensation; for in the presence of such a gun most of the existing defences of our dockyards and depots were almost useless. A Commission on National Defence was formed. It reported that new fortifications were necessary for our principal arsenals, the fleet alone being insufficient for the defence of ports. “The introduction of steam,” stated the report, “may operate to our disadvantage in diminishing to some extent the value of superior seamanship; the practice of firing shells horizontally, and the enormous extent to which the power and accuracy of aim of artillery have been increased, lead to the conclusion that after an action even a victorious fleet would be more seriously crippled and therefore a longer time unfit for service.” Thus the command of the Channel might be temporarily lost. As steam facilitated invasion, the immediate fortification of vital points on the South Coast was considered necessary. In short, faith in the mobile fleet was temporarily abandoned. The recommendations of the Commission were carried out almost in their entirety. In the case of Portsmouth, for instance, the reinforcement of the Hilsea Lines, decided on only two years previously, was suspended in favour of a defence of far greater radius--a circle of forts some of which were designed to prevent an enemy from gaining possession, from the land side, of Portsdown Hill, a ridge less than five miles from the Dockyard and therefore a position from which, with the new artillery, the Dockyard could be bombarded. A similar girdle of defences was given to Plymouth. [129] Commander R. A. E. Scott, R.N. [130] Lloyd and Hadcock. [131] Woodcroft: _Steam Navigation_, 1848. [132] de la Roncière: _La Marine Française_. [133] Woodcroft: _Steam Navigation_. [134] Rigaud: _Early Proposals for Steam Navigation_. [135] Enouf: Papin; _Sa Vie et Son Œuvre_. [136] Quoted in Fincham’s _Naval Architecture_. [137] Mr. Taylor’s evidence to Select Committee, 1824. Quoted in Woodcroft’s _Steam Navigation_. [138] Miller is said to have approached the Admiralty twice upon the subject, and certainly he was keenly interested in naval affairs. A generous tribute has been paid him by a friend whose name is honoured in our naval annals: “I was unwearied,” says John Clerk of Eldin in the preface of his Essay on Naval Tactics, published in 1804, “in my attention to the many valuable experiments of the ingenious and liberal-minded Mr. Patrick Miller of Dalswinton; to whom, whether in shipbuilding or in constructing artillery, both musketry and great guns, his country is more indebted than has hitherto been properly acknowledged.” [139] Dickinson: _Robert Fulton, Engineer and Artist_. [140] Colden: _Life of Fulton_. [141] _M. Marestier’s Report on Steam Navigation in the U.S.A._ (Morgan and Creuze, 1826). [142] _Fraser’s Magazine_, 1848. [143] In his book _On Naval Warfare with Steam_, published thirty years later, Sir Howard Douglas set out more clearly the case for the strenuous development of steam navigation by this country, and exposed one of the chief flaws in M. Paixhans’ argument. At that date it was still the all-but-universal opinion in foreign countries that the introduction of steam had rendered superiority in seamanship of comparatively little importance in naval warfare. Sir Howard Douglas showed that English superiority had spread to machine design, construction and manipulation, and that if this country chose to exert itself it could maintain its lead. It is curious to note that not one of these three writers emphasises the main disability under which France has actually suffered, viz. the unsuitability of French coal as warship fuel and the distance of her iron and coal mines from her chief shipbuilding centres. [144] Briggs: _Naval Administrations_. [145] A steam paddle-boat, named the _Lord Melville_ in honour of the descendant of Charlotte Dundas, was then plying regularly between London Bridge and Calais. [146] _Memoirs of Sir John Barrow, Bart._ [147] Williams: _Life of Sir Charles Napier_. [148] In 1835 a new department, of Royal Naval Engineers, was formed: to consist of technically trained men to manage the machinery of steam vessels. A uniform button was designed for them, and they were given the rank of Warrant Officers. Up to this time the machinery had been in charge of men who, for the most part, were “mere labourers”; and, commanding officers being ignorant of mechanical engineering, extensive fraud and waste had been practised, especially in connection with the refitting of vessels by contractors (Otway: _Steam Navigation_). [149] Reed: _On the Modifications to H.M. Ships in the XIXth century_. [150] The strategic value of steam power in warfare was first demonstrated by Lord John Hay in ’30. In the operations on the North Coast of Spain “the opportune arrival of a reinforcement of fifteen hundred fresh troops from Santander, by one steamer alone, despatched the previous day from San Sebastian, a distance of a hundred miles, for that express purpose, gave a decisive and important turn to the transactions of that day” (Otway: _Steam Navigation_). [151] Fincham. [152] The author of this work, M. Paucton, in addition to discussing the possibility of replacing the oar by the screw, threw out the suggestion of its use for aerial flight. “Je sçais qu’on ne peut guère manquer de faire rire, en voulant donner des aîles à un homme. Je sçais que plusieurs personnes, qui out osé prendre l’effor dans les airs, n’ont pas eu un meilleur succès que l’imprudent Icare.” Nevertheless, it is incontestable that a man can lift more than his weight. And if he were to employ his full force on a machine which could act on air as does the screw, it would lift him by its aid through the air as it will propel him through the water. M. Paucton hastened to calm the incredulous reader by assuring him with an affectation of levity that he was not really serious. “Il est permis de s’égayer quelquefois.” [153] A full account of these is given in Bourne’s _Treatise on the Screw Propeller_. [154] Weale: _Papers on Engineering_. [155] The _Archimedes_, with a 3-foot stroke engine which worked at 27 strokes per minute, was run against the _Widgeon_, the fastest paddlewheel steamer on the Dover station. Two points of importance were noted by the Admiralty representatives with reference to the propelling machinery of the _Archimedes_: the objectionable noise made by the spur-wheels, and their liability to damage and derangement. As, however, Mr. Smith proposed to obviate this objection “by substituting spiral gearing in lieu of the cogs” the representatives did not lay stress on these disadvantages. [156] A similar paradox was accidentally revealed in the case of the paddlewheel. It was at first thought that, the broader the floats the greater would be the pull. A certain steam vessel, however, being found to have too much beam to allow her to pass into a lock, was altered by having her floats and paddle-boxes made narrower. It was found that her speed had thereby been improved (Otway). [157] Note sur l’État des Forces Navales de la France, 1844. [158] Parliamentary Report on Screw Propulsion in H.M. Navy, 1850. [159] Sir Howard Douglas was instrumental in bringing to the notice of the Government the aggressive aims implied by the _Enquête Parlementaire_: His notes were printed confidentially in ’53 at the press of the Foreign Office. Vide his _Defence of England_, published in 1860. [160] _The Navies of the World._ Hans Busk, M.A., 1859. [161] The details of these trials against iron plate will be found in Sir Howard Douglas’ _Naval Gunnery_, third and subsequent editions. [162] The rapid construction of over two hundred gunboats and their steam machinery revealed the enormous industrial capacity of this country, and constituted a feat of which the whole nation was rightly proud. For instance of successful organization, Messrs. Penn of Greenwich contracted to build eighty sets of main engines in three months--a proposition ridiculed as impossible. By the rapid distribution of duplicate patterns throughout the country the resources of all the greatest firms were utilized, and the contract was fulfilled almost to the day! Some seven or eight years later, when the building of ironclads was being debated in parliament, the government was able to recall this achievement as an argument for not building too many ships of a new and probably transitional type. If we liked, it was said, we could soon produce a fleet of ironclads far greater than all the other Powers of Europe besides. [163] J. Scott Russell: _The Fleet of the Future: Iron or Wood?_ 1861. [164] Reed: _Our Ironclad Ships_. [165] Boynton: _The Navies of England, France, America, and Russia._ New York, ’65. [166] Colomb: _Memoirs of Sir Cooper Key_. [167] Colomb: _Memoirs of Sir Cooper Key_. [168] In parenthesis, for she is of no special interest as a type, we may note here the _Temeraire_, built at Chatham and completed in 1877: a compromise between the central-battery and the turret ship. Generally like the _Alexandra_ in disposition of armament, she carried in addition, in order to give all-round fire, two open barbettes, one at each end of the upper deck, each containing a 25-ton gun hydraulically operated. [169] The freedom of the _Royal Sovereign’s_ turrets from any liability to jam was demonstrated at Portsmouth by subjecting them to the impact of projectiles fired from the 12-ton guns of the _Bellerophon_. [170] Colomb: _Memoirs of Sir Cooper Key_. [171] Hitherto the torpedo had been used in warfare only in the form of a stationary mine, or motion had been given to it either by letting it drift on a tide or by attaching it rigidly to the bow of a vessel. After the American Civil War, in which conflict three-fourths of the ships disabled or destroyed were so disposed of by torpedoes, efforts were made to give motion to it, either by towing or by self-propulsion. In ’69 Commander Harvey, R.N., brought to the notice of the Admiralty his invention of a torpedo or sea kite which was so shaped that, when launched from the deck of a steamer and towed by a wire, it diverged from the steamer’s track and stood away at an angle of 45°. It could be exploded either electrically or by contact. The possibilities of this weapon were illustrated in a volume published in ’71, one picture of which showed luridly “an ironclad fleet surprised at sea by a squadron of torpedo craft armed with Harvey’s sea torpedoes.” The towed torpedo was overshadowed by the fish or self-propelled torpedo. In ’70 Mr. Whitehead came to England and, prosecuting experiments under the eyes of naval officers, with a 16-inch torpedo successfully sank an old corvette anchored in the Medway at 136 yards’ range. The result was the purchase by the Admiralty of his secret and sole rights. In ’77 the first torpedo-boat was ordered. [172] Colomb: _Attack and Defence of Fleets_. [173] Vice-Admiral Sir G. Elliot: _On the Classification of Ships of War_. [174] Brassey: _The British Navy_. INDEX _Active_, the, 298 _Agamemnon_, the, 288 _Ajax_, the, 288 _Alarm_, the, 44 _Alecto_, the, 239 _Alexandra_, the, 274 Anderson, Robert, 167 Anson, Lord, 43, 121, 151 Archimedes, 95, 115, 234 _Archimedes_, the, 238 _Argyle_, the, 225 Armada, the Spanish, 9, 77, 79 Armstrong, Lord, 200 Armstrong gun, the, 201, 255, 268 Atwood, 40 _Audacious_, the, 274 Bacon, Lord, 34, 93, 96 Bacon, Roger, 62 Baker, Ezekiel, 119, 189 Baker, James, 15 Baker, Matthew, 15 Balchen, Admiral, 147 Barnaby, Sir N., 50, 283, 289 Barrow, Sir J., 98, 229 Battery, central, ships, 270 Bawd, Peter, 72 Beaufoy, Colonel, 40 Beaufoy, Corporal, 190 Belleisle, siege of, 83 _Bellerophon_, the, 272 Bentham, Sir S., 55, 136, 162 Berghen-op-Zoom, siege of, 120 Bernouilli, Daniel, 37, 216 Bernouilli, John, 37, 115 Berthold the Friar, 62 _Birkenhead_, the, 257 Blake, 42 Blomefield, General, 85 Board of Ordnance, 145 Bold, Charles the, 87 Bonaparte, 165 Borda, the Chevalier, 37 Bossut, Abbé, 38 Bouguer, 37, 216 Boulton, 108, 222 Bourne, Robert, 143, 212 Boyle, 96 Boynton, 267 Brackenbury, General, 62 Bramah, 222, 234 Bridgewater, the Duke of, 218 Briggs, Sir J., 228 Broke, Sir P., 154 Brown Bess, rifle, 192 Brown, Commander, 235 Brunel, 228, 238, 277 Brunswick, rifle, 190 Buckhurst, Lord, 79 Burrell, Andrew, 23 Bushnell, 213 Busk, Hans, 184, 244 Byng, Admiral, 42 Cabots, the, 5 _Caiman_, the, 293 _Caledonia_, the, 49, 226 _Captain_, the, 280 Caus, Solomon, 95-98 Cawley, 103 _Cerberus_, the, 282 Chads, Captain, 249 Chapman, 39, 149 Charles I, King, 23 Charles II, King, 29, 96 Charles V, Emperor, 88 _Charlotte Dundas_, the, 219 Charterhouse, garden, 119 Chatfield, 59 _Chesapeake_, the, 156 Chinese gunboats, 291 Clerk of Eldin, 219 _Clermont_, the, 223 Cloyne, Bishop of, 116 Cockle, Maurice, 65 _Collingwood_, the, 292 Colomb, Admiral, 264, 287 _Colossus_, the, 288 Columbus, 5 _Comet_, the, 225, 229 _Commerce de Marseille_, the, 46 Compass, discovery of, 3 Condorcet, 38 _Congo_, the, 238 _Congress_, the, 263 Congreve, General, 85 Congreve, Sir W., 85, 91, 147, 158 _Conqueror_, the, 288 Consort, Prince, 277 Constantinople, siege of, 66 Corbett, Sir Julian, 1, 6, 7, 8, 9 _Couronne_, the, 254 Cowper Coles, Captain, 276 Creuze, Augustin, 59, 256 Cruiser, type, 298 Cumberland, Earl of, 20 _Curaçoa_, the, 230 Dahlgren, 139, 234, 261 _Dandolo_, the, 285 _Dauntless_, the, 242 Deane, Sir A., 28 Delvigne, 187, 194 _Demologos_, the, 225 Denny, Messrs., 226 Derrick, 28, 31 Desaguliers, Dr., 101 Desblancs, 217 _Devastation_, the, 281 Dirck, 98 _Doncaster_, the, 229 Douglas, Sir C., 151 Douglas, Sir H., 86, 173, 228, 257, 261 _Dreadnought_, the, 283 Duckworth, Sir J., 67 _Duilio_, the, 285 _Duke_, the, 130, 152 Dundas, Lord, 218 Dunkirk privateers, 23 Dupuy de Lôme, 253 Dutch ships, characteristics of, 27 _Dwarf_, the, 243 Elliot, Admiral, 246 Enfield rifle, 197 _Enterprise_, the, 273 Ericsson, 236 _Essex_, the, 137 Euler, 37, 216 _Excellent_, the, 158 _Ferdinand Max_, the, 263 Fincham, 1, 48, 53, 233 Finsbury Field, 82 Fitch, 220 Forbin, Count, 40 _Formidable_, the, 134, 153 Fortifications, land, 204 Fournier, Abbé, 144 Frederick the Great, 90 Fremantle, Hon. T. F., 184 Frigate, origin of, 23 Froissart, 64 Froude, 286 Fuller, 27, 171 Fulton, 221 Furring of ships, 17 _Galatea_, the, 229 Galileo, 95, 116 Galleasse, 4, 211 Galleon, 4, 7 Galley, 2, 71, 210 Gama, Vasco di, 5 Garoy, Blasco de, 212 Gautier, 216 Genoese, the, 4 Gibbon, 66, 69 Gibraltar, siege of, 250 Girdling of ships, 29 _Glatton_, the, 135, 282 _Gloire_, the, 205, 253 Gordon, Thomas, 48 _Grace à Dieu_, the, 76 _Great Britain_, the, 238 _Great Eastern_, the, 258 Greek fire, 61 Greener, 193 Gribeauval, 90 Gunpowder, 3, 70, 76, 99 Gustavus Adolphus, 90 Haddock, Sir R., 29 Halley, 117 Hampton Roads, battle of, 262 Hannay, 57 Hardy, Sir T. M., 159, 230 Harvey torpedo, 291 _Harwich_, the, 31 Hastings, Captain, 174 Hastings, Sir T., 248 Hautefeuille, J. de, 99 Hawke, Admiral, 43, 122, 151 Hawkins, Sir J., 8 Hawkins, Sir R., 9, 80 Hay, Lord John, 232 _Hébé_, the, 134 Henri II, King, 75, 89 Henry VIII, King, 6, 72 Henry, Prince, 19 _Hercules_, the, 273 Hero of Alexandria, 94 _Hibernia_, the, 48 Hime, Colonel, 61, 77 Hogue, battle of La, 32 Honourable Artillery Co., 82 Horse artillery, 91 Hoste, 37 _Hotspur_, the, 282, 287 Howard, Lord, 9, 77 Hugo, Victor, 147 Hulls, Jonathan, 215 Hutton, 122, 129, 132 Huyghens, 37, 96, 99 _Impérieuse_, the, 295 _Inconstant_, the, 298 India, East, Company, 45, 135 _Inflexible_, the, 285 Inman, Dr., 57 _Invincible_, the, 44 _Iron Duke_, the, 274 _Italia_, the, 289 Jacob, General, 196 Jal, 5 James I, King, 15 James II, King, 33 James, the historian, 49, 132 Joinville, Prince de, 240 Jouffroi, 217 Juan, Don G., 37 Kaltoff, Caspar, 97 Kempenfelt, Captain, 123 Keppel, Lord, 48 Key, Admiral Cooper, 268 Keyham, 254 Kinburn, 251 Knowles, Sir C., 45, 46 Krupp, 208 Kuper, Admiral, 206 _Lady Nancy_, the, 276 Laird, Messrs., 252, 280 Laputa, 34 Laughton, Sir J. K., 1, 9, 77, 153 Lepanto, battle of, 72, 78 _Lepanto_, the, 289 Lefroy, General, 67 Leibnitz, 214 Leipsic lexicon, 244 Lissa, battle of, 263 Livingstone, 222 Louis XI, King, 87 _Magenta_, the, 272 Malthus, 82 Manby, Aaron, 255 Manwayring, Sir H., 13, 143 Marestier, 224 _Mars_, the, 121 Marshall gun carriage, 158 Marsilly gun carriage, 158 _Mary Rose_, the, 74 Massé, Colonel, 86 Maudsley, Messrs., 285 _Maure_, the, 41 McLaurin, Colin, 39 _Medea_, the, 230 Melville, General, 127 Melville, Lord, 228 Mercier, Captain, 163 _Merrimac_, the, 262 Metacentre, discovery of, 37 Middleton, Sir C., 46, 123 Miller, Patrick, 127, 217 Minié, rifle, 195 _Minotaur_, the, 265 _Monarch_, the, 279 _Monitor_, the, 262 _Monkey_, the, 229 Monro, Colonel, 173 Mons Meg, 65 Moore, Sir Jonas, 98, 143 Moorfields, 82 Moorsom, Captain, 261, 266 Morland, Sir S., 29, 99 Muller, 84, 88 Murray, Mungo, 39 _Nancy Dawson_, the, 58 Napier, Sir C., 230, 233, 241, 255, 266 Napoleon III, 75, 87, 199, 250 Navarino, battle of, 156 Nelson, 45, 154, 269 _Nemesis_, the, 255 Newcomen, 102-106 Newton, 35, 96, 117, 214 Nicolas, Sir H., 3, 63 Noble, Captain, 207 Noel, Commander, 264, 289 Normans as shipbuilders, 5 Norton, Captain, 193, 199 Norton, Robert, 76, 78, 142 Nye, Nathaniel, 98 Oak, English, 27 _Odin_, the, 233 Oppenheim, 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 73, 75, 77, 81 _Orient_, the, 164 Otway, Commander, 110, 231 _Pacificateur_, the, 172, 248 Paixhans, 166, 227 Pakington, Sir J., 258 _Pallas_, the, 279 Palliser, Major, 205 Papin, 102, 213 Pardies, 36 Pascal, 95 Peake, Sir H., 56 Pechell, Captain, 157 Peel, 257 _Pembroke_, the, 41 _Penelope_, the, 233 Penn, Messrs., 253 Pennington, Sir J., 23 Pepys, 27, 33, 81, 96, 130 Perrin, 15 Pett, Peter, 23 Pett, Phineas, 15, 18 Petty, Sir W., 35 _Phœbe_, the, 138 _Phœnix_, the, 26, 175 Pickard, 108, 217 Pitt, 49 Plat, Sir H., 186 Point-blank defined, 114 Porta, della, 95 Potter, Humphrey, 105 Prevesa, battle of, 72 _Prince Albert_, the, 278 _Prince Royal_, the, 19 _Princessa_, the, 43 Proof of guns, 81 Punchinello, 130 _Rainbow_, the, 134 Raleigh, Sir W., 16, 24, 79 _Raleigh_, the, 298 Ram tactics, 263, 290 Ramelli, 212 _Rattler_, the, 239 _Ré d’Italia_, the, 263 Reed, Sir E., 59, 274, 279 Richelieu, 24, 212 Riders in ships, 11 _Rob Roy_, the, 226 Robins, Benjamin, 112-124, 129, 187 Robison, 106 Rodney, 134, 153 _Rolf Krake_, the, 277 Romme, 38 Roncière, de la, 212 Ross, Sir J., 227 _Royal George_, the, 43, 83 _Royal Katherine_, the, 35 Royal Society, foundation of, 96 _Royal Sovereign_, the, 278 _Royal William_, the, 28 _Ruby_, the, 249 Rumsey, 220 _Rupert_, the, 288 Rupert, Prince, 214 Russell, Scott, 252, 257, 264 Samuda, Messrs., 278 Sartorius, Admiral, 261 _Savannah_, the, 226 Savery, 100, 215 Schalk, 83 Scharnhorst, 88 Schmidt, 184 Scloppetaria, 184 Scott, Commander, 200 _Scourge of Malice_, the, 20 Seppings, Sir R., 46, 51 Sewell, 39 _Shah_, the, 298 _Shannon_, the, 154, 299 Sheathing, introduction of, 18 Sheerness, 254 Shish, 29, 35 Shovell, Admiral, 81 Shrapnel, Lieutenant, 91, 163 _Sidon_, the, 233 Simmons, Captain, 164, 176 _Simoon_, the, 249 Sinope, battle of, 162, 249 Slingsby, Sir R., 145 Smith, Pettit, 236 Snodgrass, 47 _Solferino_, the, 272 _Sovereign of the Seas_, the, 24 Spitalfields, 81, 130 _Sprightly_, the, 229 Stanhope, Lord, 221, 228 Stevinus, 95 Stockton, Captain, 237 _Stromboli_, the, 276 _Sultan_, the, 273 Surveyors, abilities of, 55 Sussex, iron mines, 69, 78 Sutherland, T., 35 Sveaborg, bombardment of, 252 Symington, 218 Symonds, Admiral, 57 Tactics, 2, 8, 30, 33, 77, 131, 153, 210, 263 Tartaglia, 89, 116 Taylor, 218 Tegetthof, Admiral, 263 _Temeraire_, the, 275 Tennant, Sir E., 200 _Terrible_, the, 233 _Thames_, the, 225 “Thieves, Forty,” the, 56 Thouvenin, Colonel, 195 _Thunderer_, the, 283 Torelli, 212 Torpedo, evolution of, 291 Torricelli, 95 Touchard, Admiral, 264 _Trades Increase_, the, 21 Trafalgar, battle of, 45, 49, 53, 269 Treuille de Beaulieu, 199 Trim, definition of, 13 Trinity House, 24 Trollope, Captain, 135 Tromp, 31 Trunnions, evolution of, 86 Truss frames, 52 Tunnage, 5, 49, 56 Turgot, 38 Turret, the evolution of, 271, 275 Types, differentiation of, 296 Upnor Castle, 81 _Vanguard_, the, 274 Vauban, Marshal, 160 Ventilation, study of, 44 _Victory_, the, 45, 53, 147 Villani, 64 Vincennes, 194, 250 _Volage_, the, 298 Walker, Captain, 193 Wallis, 35, 96 Walter, 120 Waltham Abbey, 85 _Warrior_, the, 205, 260 _Warspite_, the, 295 Watt, 93, 105-110, 217 Waymouth, Captain, 17 Wellington, 240 _Whelps_, the, 23 Whitehead, 292 Whitworth, Sir J., 197 Willett, 43, 48 Woodcraft, 212 Woolwich, 82 Worcester, Marquis of, 93, 97, 213 Wynter, Sir R., 145 Zöllner, 184 Transcriber’s Notes Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed. Archaic spellings have not been changed; the spelling of non-English words has not been changed. Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced quotation marks retained. Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained; occurrences of inconsistent hyphenation have not been changed. Pages with Plate-illustrations included printer’s information regarding the pages the plates should face. That information has been removed in this eBook, as those illustrations are positioned as close as possible to those pages. The spelling and grammar of French text has been reproduced here as it was printed in the original book. The publication information of a few citations was italicized, but as that is not the style in most of the book, those words and dates are shown here unitalicized. Footnotes, originally at the bottoms of pages, have been collected and placed just before the Index of this eBook. Index not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page references. Page 5: “tunnage” was printed that way and is in the Index, but the other pages to which the Index entry refers spell the word as “tonnage”. Page 23: “remonstance” was printed that way. Page 47: “to their rates, And” was printed that way. Page 72: “the King’s feedmen” was printed that way, probably should be “freedmen”. Page 265: “Give her the stem” was printed that way. *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE EVOLUTION OF NAVAL ARMAMENT *** Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed. Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. START: FULL LICENSE THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license. Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg electronic works 1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. 1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. 1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it without charge with others. 1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States. 1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: 1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed: This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook. 1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. 1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg. 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License. 1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. 1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that: • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.” • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works. • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work. • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. 1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. 1.F. 1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. 1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. 1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem. 1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. 1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. 1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work, and (c) any Defect you cause. Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life. Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS. The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate. While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate. International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate. Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg electronic works Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org. This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.