The President asks whether it would not be suitable to present a precise formula as to the minimum caliber.

General den Beer Poortugael proposes that the types of guns remain the same and that calibers 6, 7, and 8 be accepted as limits.

In the general discussion of the second proposition of the Russian circular, Captain Crozier declares that the suggestion to prohibit the use of more powerful powders than those at present adopted might run counter to one of the principal objects of the Russian proposition. Suppose that by a more powerful powder we mean a powder which imparts a greater velocity to a projectile of a given weight or the same velocity to a heavier projectile,-it is known that a powder is powerful in proportion to the production of the volume of gas furnished by the temperature of the combustion. Now, it might very well be supposed possible to produce a powder which, by furnishing a greater volume of gas at a lower temperature of combustion, might be more powerful than any powder now in use and which at the same time, by reason of the low temperature, would strain [43] the gun less, which would enable the latter to be kept in service for a

longer time. To forbid the use of such a powder would, by preventing the saving to be effected thereby, hinder the beneficent object of a reduction of military expenses. These remarks apply not only to the gun, but are made in obedience to a suggestion of the president that it would be well to expatiate first on the more simple questions, while reserving the more difficult ones for subsequent discussions.

Colonel Künzli asks whether it would not be well to prohibit projectiles which aggravate wounds and increase the sufferings of the wounded. He adds that he has the so-called "dumdum " bullets in view.

At the request of the PRESIDENT, Mr. KÜNZLI will bring a formula to the next meeting.

Mr. den Beer Poortugael favors the prohibition of inhumane projectiles which produce incurable wounds. The dumdum bullets, the point of which is very soft, the casing of the projectile being very hard, and the interior being formed of a softer substance, burst in the body; the entrance is thin and the exit enormous. These ravages are not necessary; it is sufficient to render an armed man unable to serve for a time, and it is useless to mutilate him.

The Dutch Government authorized the General to ask the absolute prohibition of the use of dumdum bullets and similar projectiles.

The President observes that the proposition of the Dutch Government is but an extension of the principle endorsed at St. Petersburg in 1868.

General Sir John Ardagh says there must be a misunderstanding, as the dumdum bullets do not entail the consequences attributed to them, being bullets like other ones-ordinary projectiles.

The President observes that there ought to be concrete formulas in order to approach practically the various aspects of the problem.

There is established an exchange of views on the proposition formulated by Colonel GILINSKY, during the course of which the following declarations were obtained:

GERMANY

The question will be very difficult to settle; we are ready to take part in the discussion and to take everything ad referendum, but we have no proposition to present.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

In regard to the question of agreement not to adopt new small arms for a term of years, Captain CROZIER stated that the Government of the United States did not desire to limit itself in regard to the case of new inventions having for object the increase of efficiency of military weapons, although there is at present no question of change of small arms.

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY

I can accept the discussion only ad referendum, as the delegate from Germany has done. However, I believe that the Austro-Hungarian delegation could agree to the proposition not to change the present gun for some time; but it would seem to be very difficult to determine what that present gun is. As a matter of fact, if permission is given to improve the gun, it must be remarked that even a very slight improvement may entirely change the character of a weapon. It will therefore be very difficult to set limits in this matter. It would be necessary, furthermore, to know whether, as was mentioned by the delegate from Portugal, a gun under study can be considered as a present gun. Finally, I repeat that I can not accept the decisions to be reached otherwise than ad referendum.

BELGIUM

Count DE GRELLE ROGIER declares that he can accept the formula of General DEN BEER POORTUGAEL as regards the choice between calibers 6, 7, or 8 of the gun.

DENMARK

I have no special instructions from my Government; in my personal opinion Denmark will not change her present gun for ten years, but we ought to have the freedom of improving the ammunition, etc.

SPAIN

Spain agrees on principle with the opinion expressed by the Austrian delegate and can accept the proposition of Colonel GILINSKY, of course only in regard to the gun.

The French delegate asks that a very precise form of wording determine, if possible, the limits of the modifications, improvements, or transformations both of the guns and ammunition, which should not be separated.

GREAT BRITAIN

Sir JOHN ARDAGH declares that he has no proposition to submit on the question of restriction applied to guns and that he will accept the decision of the subcommission ad referendum.

ITALY

General ZUCCARI observes that the question laid down by Russia presupposes that the guns of the several nations differ very little. Other delegates have already observed that this difference is not so slight; as a matter of fact it is considerable. General ZUCCARI would be willing to agree to the French and Austrian proposition; but it would be very difficult to come to an understanding without first determining the principal data with regard to the weaponthe standard model of gun.

JAPAN

The Japanese delegation is ready to accept ad referendum the decisions of the Commission provided a clear and precise formula can be presented on the question under discussion, as was maintained by the Austrian, French, and Italian delegates.

NETHERLANDS

The Netherland Government can accept the proposition of the Russian Government with regard to rifles.

PERSIA

Persia, being convinced that the Russian propositions are entirely humane, fully shares the opinion and supports the proposition of the Russian Government to decide on a system of gun for five or six years as a trial.

Ad referendum.

PORTUGAL

Portugal adheres to the opinion expressed by Austria-Hungary, backed by France and Italy, that is, that it will be necessary to make a very precise statement of the technical data of the gun which are not to be changed during a certain period.

ROUMANIA

The Government of His Majesty the King of Roumania is very favorable to the Russian proposition, the purpose of which is to maintain, by virtue of an international understanding and for a certain number of years, the types of improved guns now in use in most of the European armies, in order to put a stop to the disastrous competition which is going on owing to the periodic and frequent renewal of the guns in the various nations.

The Royal Government would therefore agree to a precise and practical

solution calculated to satisfy the idea expressed by Colonel GILINSKY on behalf of the Imperial Government.

Meanwhile, I can take only ad referendum the idea expressed in regard to the gun question.

RUSSIA

Fixing of a period of ten or five years during which the guns now in service shall not be replaced by any other models. It is agreed that the automatic gun exists at present only as a proposition and is not yet adopted anywhere. The improvement of the models now in service is permitted on condition that the fundamental type shall not be changed.

The delegate from Serbia declares that Serbia, still possessing at the present time a system of gun which is obsolete, is about to replace it by a modern model, and can not on its part accept the proposition of the Russian delegate.

SIAM

On behalf of the Siamese Government, PHYA SURIYA fully adheres to the proposition made by Colonel GILINSKY on behalf of the Russian Government, to decide that, for a certain number of years to be determined, the guns at present in use in each nation shall not be changed.

SWEDEN AND NORWAY

I join ad referendum in the opinion just expressed by the representative from Austria-Hungary as regards the gun.

SWITZERLAND

The delegate from Switzerland takes the question ad referendum. He believes that the Government will give its adhesion to an agreement concerning the gun if a precise and clear wording is found.

TURKEY

ABDULLAH PASHA, finding no limit to the improvement of guns, makes the same reservations as the Austrian delegate.

BULGARIA

Setting of a period of five to ten years during which the guns now in use should not be replaced by other models.

Improvements in the models now in service would be permitted provided the fundamental type were not changed.

It is agreed that automatic guns exist at present only as a proposition.

The President calls attention to the extreme difficulty of reaching any result unless a clear and precise form of wording is proposed. The sense of the Russian

formula seems to be as follows: prohibition of new firearms, each one remaining free to adopt the guns now in use.

For the next meeting we must have clear and precise formulas, in order to see whether we can reach an understanding on the conventional restrictions to be placed during five years on the type of gun and what modifications should be permitted in regard to ammunition; finally, the question presents itself likewise in regard to cannon. Should a minimun caliber, weight of projectile, and initial velocity be fixed? Should the number of shots per minute be restricted? Should the St. Petersburg Convention be extended to explosive or flattening bullets? Should automatic loading be excluded?

The meeting adjourns.