The longitudinal or end strength varies: thus, in the German guns, the tube and hoops do nothing--the jacket is considered sufficient. The French construction relies entirely on the thick body, while the English method aims at utilizing the whole section of the gun, both ways. Of course, if the others are strong enough, there is no particular advantage in this; and it is by no means improbable that eventually we shall find it cheaper, and equally good, to substitute hoops for the "overcoat." I fear I have detained you a long time over construction, but it is both instructive and interesting to note that certain well defined points of contact now exist between all the great systems. Thus, a surface of steel inside the bore is common to all, and the general use of steel is spreading fast. Shrinkage, again, is now everywhere employed, and such differences as still exist are matters rather of detail than of principle, as far as systems of construction are concerned. We now come to a part of the question which has long been hotly debated in this country, and about which an immense quantity of matter has been both spoken and written on opposite sides--I mean muzzle loading and breech-loading. The controversy has been a remarkable one, and, perhaps, the most remarkable part of it has been the circumstance that while there is now little doubt that the advocates of breech-loading were on the right side, their reasons were for the most part fallacious. Thus, they commonly stated that a gun loaded at the breech could be more rapidly fired than one loaded at the muzzle. Now, this was certainly not the case, at any rate, with the comparatively short guns which were made on both systems a few years ago. The public were acquainted with breech-loaders only in the form of sporting guns and rifles, and argued from them. The muzzle-loading thirty eight ton guns were fired in a casemate at Shoeburyness repeatedly in less than twenty minutes for ten rounds, with careful aiming. No breech-loader of corresponding size has, I think, ever beaten that rate. With field-guns in the open, the No. 1 of the detachment can aim his muzzle loader while it is being loaded, while he must wait to do so till loading at the breech is completed. Again, it was freely stated that, with breech-loaders greater protection was afforded to the gunners than with the muzzle-loaders. This entirely depends on how the guns are mounted. If in siege works or _en barbette_, it is much easier to load a muzzle loader under cover than a breech-loader. But I need not traverse the old ground all over again. It is sufficient for me to say here, that the real cause which has rendered breech-loading an absolute necessity is the improvement which has been made in the powder. You witnessed a few minutes ago the change which took place in the action of fired gunpowder when the grains were enlarged. You will readily understand that nearly the whole of a quick