Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

Mr. Ramsay is the avowed panegyrift of Mr. Pitt, and of every other person who had the good fortune to obtain popular fame during the war. Obferve in what manner. he apologizes for Mr. Pitt's adopting continental measures after he affumed the reins of administration:

The unpopular party, however, was not entirely excluded from a fhare in the adminiftration. Their influence in the Privy Council, and credit in the House of Commons, were ftill great, and fufficient to thwart every measure in which they did not partake. A coalition of parties therefore took place from neceffity.-- It was now propofed to gratify our King, with affifting our allies on the continent, in the manner most agreeable to our infular fituation, which is by making diverfions with our fleets; and it was alfo agreed that we should aid them with fuch land force and money as our ftrength. and finances would admit.'

Mr. Ramfay here thinks it neceffary to make an apology for his hero, that he did not judge neceffary for himself, as he afterwards claimed the fole honour of having conquered America in Germany.

This compendium would have been more ufeful, if the Author had taken care to infert, in the margin, the precife dates. of the feveral occurrences that are mentioned in the text; for want of which the Reader is often at a lofs, in regard to the order of time and the fucceffion of events.

With respect to the copper-plates mentioned in the title-page, for elegant,' read execrable. Buricola

ART. V. A Difcourfe on the Theory of Gunnery. Delivered at the
Anniversary Meeting of the Royal Society, Nov. 30th, 1778.
By Sir John Pringle, Baronet. Published by their Order. 4to.
I s. 6 d. L. Davis.

[ocr errors]

HIS moft excellent difcourfe, the laft we are to expect from its truly ingenious and learned Author, was delivered on prefenting Sir Godfrey Copley's gold medal to Mr. Cha. Hutton of the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, for his paper, entitled, "The Force of fired Gunpowder, and the initial Velocities of Cannon-Balls, determined from Experie ments."

After premifing a fhort account of fome of the principal mi litary engines, ufed by the ancients before the difcovery of gunpowder, and the invention of guns, the Prefident proceeds to give a concife account of the principal improvements which have been made, from time to time, in the theory and practice of gunnery. From which it appears that Nicholas Tartaglia, who lived about the beginning of the fixteenth century, was the first who maintained that no part of the path of a cannon

ball

ball is a straight line. It does not, however, appear that Tartaglia made any attempts towards determining what the true path was. There is indeed, reason to suppose that he had deviated fufficiently from the opinions of his contemporaries in denying that it was a straight line, obvious as it may appear at this day, and which is more to be wondered at, as every operation in nature, where projectile motion is concerned, muft have tended to convince them of it. But, as Sir John obferves, one would imagine, from numerous inftances, that men of science were so far from making experiments themselves in those days, that they even fhut their eyes against what chance would other wife have presented to their fight.

To investigate the path which a projectile actually describes in a non-refitting medium was referved for Galileo, the inventor of the telescope, and the morning-ftar of the feventeenth century; which afterwards produced thofe glorious luminaries of fcience Hook, Huygens, Halley, and Newton. After the demonAtrations of Galileo, every one feems to have rested satisfied that the theory of gunnery was complete, and that nothing remained to be done for it but to reduce the theory to practice, until Newton, in 1687, published his Principia, wherein he demonftrates that the refiftance of the air is great enough to make the difference between the curve of projection of heavy bodies, and that of a parabola, very fenfible, and therefore too confiderable to be neglected. Soon after, namely, in 1690, M. Huygens demonftrated the fame thing. No notice, however, appears to have been taken of the demonftrations of thefe great men; nor yet of M. de Refons, a French officer of artillery, of high military rank, and great profeffional abilities; and, moreover, diftinguished by the number of fieges which he had served at; who, in the year 1716, reprefented to the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, that," although it was agreed that theory joined to practice conftituted the perfection of every art, yet experience had taught him that theory was of very little service in the use of mortars. That although, in the work of M. Blondel, the feveral parabolic lines are justly enough described, according to the different degrees of the elevation of the piece, yet that practice had convinced him there was no theory in the effects of gunpowder: for that having endeavoured, with the greatest precifion, to point a mortar agreeably to thefe calculations, he had never been able to establish any folid foundation upon them +." For we find no attempts toward improving this art before our countryman, Mr. Benjamin Robins, undertook it, about the year 1740, and made the experiments which are

• L'Art de jetter les Bombes.

↑ Mem. de l'Acad. R. des Sc. 1716.

related

related in his "New Principles of Gunnery," published in 1742. From thefe experiments it inconteftably appeared that the refiftance made by the air to projectiles, which have a rapid motion, is much greater than had been fuppofed even by Newton and Huygens themselves; and that it is indeed fo great that the path described by any fhot whatever is very different from the curve of a parabola; and, confequently, that all applications of that conic fection to gunnery are falfe, and totally useless.

But Mr. Robins's experiments being made with fhot of an ounce weight only, it was much to be wished that such perfons as had opportunity, might repeat the fame experiments with balls of a larger fize, and also with balls of different sizes. This was undertaken by Mr. Hutton: and in the course of his experiments he ufed balls from 20 to 50 ounces weight; the refult of which confirmed Mr. Robins's principles in the most ample manner, as may be seen at large in his paper; fome account of which was given in vol. lx. p. 417 of our Review.

Some perfons having objected to the fubject of Mr. Hutton's paper, as being not fo immediately an object of the Society's inftitution as others of a different nature; we shall tranfcribe the concluding paragraph of this fenfible and well-written difcourfe, to fhew that the queftion did not escape the confideration of this learned body, before they conferred the greatest mark of honour which they have to bestow, on the Author of it. Some,' fays this humane and benevolent man, may think, that the object of this Society are the arts of peace alone, not thofe of war, and that confidering how numerous and how keen the inftruments of death already are, it would better become us to difcourage than to countenance their farther improvement. These naturally will be the first thoughts of the beft difpofed minds. But when upon a closer examination we find, that fince the invention of arms of the quickest execution, neither battles nor fieges have been more frequent nor more deftructive, indeed apparently otherwife; may we not thence infer, that fuch means as have been employed to fharpen the fword, have tended more to diminish than to increase the number of its victims, by fhortening contefts, and making them more decifive. I fhall not however infist on maintaining fo great a paradox; but only furmife that whatever state would adopt the Utopian maxims, and profcribe the study of arms, would foon, I fear, become a prey to thofe who best knew how to use them. For yet, alas! far feem we to be removed from thofe promised times, when nation shall not lift up fword against nation, neither fhall they learn war any more.

W.

ART.

ART. VI. An Enquiry into the Policy of making Conquefts for the Mahometans in India by the British Arms; in Anfwer to a Pamphlet en titled, Confiderations on the Conquest of Tanjore *. 4to. 35. DodЛley.

WE

1779.

E have here an ingenious and fpirited apology for the conduct of the Directors of the Eaft India Company, in taking the kingdom of Tanjore from the Nabob of Arcot, and reftoring it to its former fovereign. In juftice to the Author, and for the fatisfaction of our Readers, we fhall give a fummary of the principal arguments which are here adduced in juftification of this measure.

Our Author confiders the conquest of Tanjore, first on the ground of authority, and then on that of reafon and justice. On the former ground, he obferves-that there is no evidence of the truth of any material charge against the Rajah, which could lay the Company under an obligation to make this conqueft for the Nabob of Arcot. The authorities produced as records in fupport of the Nabob's right are, for the most part, nothing more than the mere reprefentations of thofe fervants of the Company who have affifted the Nabob in his ufurpation. Of this nature is the correfpondence of the Select Committee of Madras. And even thefe authorities do not come up to the purpose for which they are produced; for the Select Committee never either informed the Directors that they had the conqueft of Tanjore in view, or recommended that measure; and, befides, they confefs explicitly, that they acted in this affair against their own judgment.-The orders of the Company do not amount to an authority to make this conqueft; they only exprefs the Company's difapprobation of the Rajah's conduct, in fome inftances, and their wifh, that when convenient he may be chaftifed, and the Nabob's pretenfions against him rendered effectual. Thefe pretenfions, communicated to the Directors, were only that the Nabob might receive the arrears of his pifhcufh or tribute money, and a reasonable fum towards the charges of the war with Hyder Ali. The Prefidency themselves exprefsly acknowledge, that they had no caufe to infer from any orders of the Company, that it was their wish the country of Tanjore fhould be conquered for the Nabob; and they exprefsly informed the Nabob, that any measures taken for this purpose could only be temporary, till the Company's pleasure be known; and declare it to be the Company's wish, not to fubvert the established government of any power, with which they have connection.-Whatever errors the Company may have fallen into in this affair, have been owing to their giving too into in his

* See Review for April, 1779, p. 296.

caly

eafy credit to their fervants abroad, who fcrupled not to miflead them by the moft unjuftifiable mifreprefentations, of which the Directors have frequently complained.

Our Author next confiders the conqueft of Tanjore on the ground of reafon and juftice.-When the Company first began to interfere in the politics of India, they found the then king of Tanjore an hereditary fovereign, formed their first regular alliance with him, and, by his affiftance, gave the firft turn to the war with France. The exertions of the king of Tanjore were immediately in fupport of the Nabob against his rival Chunda Saheb, and put him in peaceable poffeffion of his government. But the wealth and fplendour in which the king then lived, excited the envy of the Nabob, and led him to form the defign of extirpating him. This the Prefidency acknowledged. When he was compelled by neceffity to relinquish this defign, he formed a plan for the extirpation of Hyder Ali, the Nabob of Myfore, and engaged the arms of the Company in this wicked fcheme. Still, however, he kept in view the conquest of Tanjore, and omitted no means to bring on a rupture with that kingdom. At length, having failed in his attempt against Hyder Ali, that he might balance the loffes that he had fuftained, and accomplish his favourite object, he engaged in the war of 1771 against Tanjore, fupported by the Prefidency.

After this account of the real motives of the war, our Author proceeds to examine the pretexts on which it was undertaken. The first pretext was, that in the war with Hyder Ali, the Rajah had not fent affiftance to the Nabob.-To this it is replied, that the King of Tanjore was not bound by any treaty whatever to take part in this war, as even his enemies confefs. The war was undertaken, without confulting the Rajah, and in direct oppofition to his interefts: had it been fuccessful, it would have left Tanjore entirely at the mercy of the Nabob. Yet, notwithstanding this, from a defire of being on good terms with the English, the Rajah fent 3000 men, under Colonel Wood, to the affiftance of the Nabob. Befide, if he had incurred any blame in this tranfaction, it was wiped off by the treaty of peace with Hyder Ali, in which the Rajah was included.

The second pretext was, the non-payment of the pishcush to the Mogul, through the hands of the Nabob, according to the treaty of 1762. Here no proof of the refufal of payment is brought. The payment was only delayed for three months, on account of the expence the Rajah had fuftained from the war with Hyder Ali. The Company had been themfelves in the fame fituation with refpect to the Rajah, having neglected for five years to pay a pifhcufh for the town of Devicota.

The

[ocr errors]
« ElőzőTovább »