Sir Hugh Gough has stated in his despatch, that the ammunition of the artillery had been completely exhausted in this protracted engagement. And an able writer in the _Calcutta Review_ (No. XI.) has made a similar assertion, which, however, is not quite correct as to the time indicated, as all the troops of horse-artillery present were engaged with Tej Singh. The author of the article on the “Sikh invasion of British India” adds, “We believe the complement of a horse-artillery gun on service is 300 rounds.” This is not quite accurate. Each 6-pounder gun carries with it 128 rounds of all sorts; and each 12-pounder howitzer has 80 rounds. The troops of horse-artillery from Umballah and Loodianah had each two spare 6-pounder waggons, and one howitzer waggon, making up the complement to 166⅖ rounds per gun, and 140 per howitzer. The Ferozepore troops brought out with them no extra waggons, and the two guns of the 2nd troop 3rd brigade had no spare ammunition at all. Footnote 101: The order was given to the brigadier, without authority from the Commander-in-Chief. Footnote 102: “The royal waggons carry 146 rounds a gun, the Indian waggons, I believe, only contain 96 rounds. In the royal service, the (6-pounder) gun and waggon carry 194 rounds a gun. The extra waggons in the royal service have 29 rounds a gun, and in the Indian service only 19 rounds a gun. The waggon in the Indian service is, I have no doubt, best adapted to the country and the draught animals, but if a battery of five guns had ten waggons (and the howitzer one waggon), the number of rounds a gun would be about 220. The 9-pounder field batteries, I understand, take into action 139 rounds a gun. The royal 9-pounder takes 166.”—_Minute of Lord Hardinge, Feb. 2, 1847._ Footnote 103: In a memorandum on this subject left by Captain Buckle, the author says:—“At Sobraon, the heavy guns, which had been waited for nearly a month, were placed on the plain about 1,300 yards from the intrenchments, instead of in batteries prepared for them at half that distance, and the facilities for which were great in the abundance of men and material, and in the softness of the soil. They might easily have been erected during the night of the 9-10th of February, had previous arrangements been made; and had this been done, the enemy’s intrenchments, instead of being nearly uninjured, would have been swept away by the storm of shot poured upon them. As it was, the effect of the fire was greater on the defenders of the works than upon the works themselves; and quite as much as was expected by those competent to form an opinion, considering the greatness of the distance, and the shortness of time during which they fired. And for the selection of the distance we are credibly informed that the artillery are not responsible.” Footnote 104: