The best shooting company in the army during the year is the left flank company of the 2nd Battalion of Scots Fusilier Guards, its figure of merit being 147-78.

The best shots in the army in the yearly course of practice for 1864-5, are Private Ainos Wolfern, 4th Battalion Rifle Brigade, who scored 106 points with the Whitworth rifle, in the first and second classes; and Colour-Sergeant John McDowell, 2nd Battalion 16th Foot, who scored 90 points with the Enfield rifle in the first and second classes.

The best judge of distance is Private E. Ellis, Depôt 53rd Foot, who obtained 26 points in the first class. In the 32nd companyRoyal Engineers, 1st Battalion 1st Foot, 56th Foot, and 4th Battalion 60th Rifles, there are men who have obtained a higher score than Private Ellis; but as such men did so by being exercised within the distances prescribed for the third class, when executing the third period, oftener than the regulations authorised (for, by no other means could they obtain the scores recorded against their names in the annual returns,) the position of best judge of distance is assigned to Private Ellis.

Seven thousand and nine hundred men of the several Regiments of cavalry, armed with the rifle carbine, have been exercised out of a strength per annual returns rendered, exclusive of recruits, and not including the household cavalry-of 10,160. The figure of merit of the shooting of the cavalry at 300 yards is nearly 26 points, and the percentage of men in the first and third classes in judging distance is 42 of the former and eight of the latter. The following is the order of merit in the cavalry :

1. 1st Dragoon Guards.

Now, for cavalry, we submit that the above figures of merit are very satisfactory. Whilst the adoption of rifled arms for mounted troops infers an important necessity for instruction in handling them, and whilst it would be absurd as well as useless to place an improved weapon in hands unable to use it to the best advantage, we must remember that there will always be peculiar difficulties to be overcome by the cavalry soldier in applying the rules of musketry; and the difficulty of habituating his horse to the report of the rifle is not the least. His firing, therefore, strictly depends upon his individual exertion, and it becomes the complement of his training. If it be important that the cavalry should know how to manage their horses at all their rates of movement, it is equally essential to complete their training as soldiers, by teaching them how to handle their carbine and pistol with skill and precision. Before the African war the utility of fire-arms in the hands of cavalry might be doubted; but the experience of the last thirty years has changed our ideas on this subject, and the officers who served in the Algerian war have acknowledged that fire-arms in the hands of cavalry were not restricted as some pretended, to the office of signalling the approach of the enemy. It is not supposed that cavalry skirmishers, whatever proficiency they may acquire, can ever rival those of the infantry. The conditions of the fight are too dissimilar to admit of such an idea; but between skirmishers of the same arm, the advantage will be always with those who, by progressive practice, shall acquire the greatest proficiency in the use of the rifle.

Musketry instruction in the cavalry is not intended to lead to any radical change-such as the employment of a "mixed cavalry," having the double character of a troop of horse and foot soldiers. The principles on which the organisation of cavalry is founded remain unalterable; the only object is to enhance its power, to increase its efficiency as cavalry. The French carry out the instruction of their cavalry in musketry to a much further extent than we do-firing on horseback at all the rates-but doubtless in time we shall attempt something of the sort,-always bearing in mind, however, that relative efficiency with the weapon is all that can be required or expected in the given circumstances.

Ninety-eix thousand men of the infantry, including the Royal Engineers, have been exercised out of a strength per annual returns rendered, exclusive of recruits, of 111,882.

Of the number instructed, nearly one fourth passed into the first class in shooting, under the highest test, and 79 per cent passed into the first class in judging distance, leaving only 2 per cent in the third class.

The non-exercised men, after deducting all cases that are satisfactorily accounted for, are numerous-being equal to nearly 12 per cent of the strength of the infantry. The results of the rapid file-firing are bad, and those of the skirmishing practices are only moderate. The general "figure of merit" of the Infantry is only

49.35 points; but then it really seems to mean that half its shots would be effective-which will tell a different tale of firing to that of the olden time, when, we are assured, 3000 cartridges had to be expended to disable only one man, as at the Battle of Salamanca ; or, elsewhere, as others say, 10,000 shots for each man killed or hit,whilst Colonel Schlimbach, of the Prussian artillery, an officer of great experience, and whose statistical calculations extend over a long series of engagements during the wars of Napoleon, avers that, on the average, a man's own weight in lead, and ten times his weight in iron, were consumed for each individual placed hors de combat!

Even in modern times-at the Battle of Solferino, the French fired fifteen millions of cartridges to shoot only 10,000 Austrians, at the most;-which shows that it took 1,500 bullets to kill or wound one man, and this quantity represents a weight of 200 lbs.

The rifles with which the annual course of practice was executed by the different branches of the service are as follows:

-

In the Cavalry,-Westley Richards, Sharp's, and Terry's breech-loading rifle carbines, and the East India pattern Enfield and interchangeable muzzle-loading rifle carbines.

In the Royal Engineers,-Lancaster's elliptical bore rifle.

In the Rifle Battalions,-Whitworth, the short Enfield, pattern 1856, and naval pattern 1858, rifles.

In the Battalion of Guards and Line,-the long Enfield rifle, pattern 1853.

Such is the "practice" of the British Army. The points scored by an individual, a section, a company, or a battalion, are ascertained to a decimal. There is no possibility of vain boasting, for all is reduced to what is termed the "figure of merit" in every Regiment. By that we must stand or fall. By that the Government and the country can discover annually, and proclaim, so to speak, the war-power of the nation. By that Foreign Governments will know how to estimate our power of defence or attack, and "inly ruminate the danger;" whist we may, indeed, be permitted to "pluck comfort from its looks."

THE OAR.

The most ancient mode of propelling boats through the water by hand labour was probably by means of oars of nearly the same shape, and worked in the same manner, as those in use at the present time. And to all appearance there is no likelihood of a change, for although many savage tribes work their canoes and other narrow boats with hand paddles, and attain great speed with them, yet seamen of civilized nations, whose boats are mostly of

a more burdensome character, and whose bodies are encumbered with clothing, have, without exception, given preference to the oar, as an instrument of greater power, and worked with more convenience.

And, truly, there is no more beautiful instrument than an oar, when we consider its simplicity, the ease with which it is worked, and the readiness with which its position is accommodated to the ever-varying motion of the boat and the sea's surface. It has often been proposed-indeed, it is a favourite notion with theorists -to propel lifeboats by rotary paddle-wheels and screws, such as those of steamers; but the proposition is altogether an impracti cable one, and its trial could only result in failure. Where great power and velocity of motion can be applied, as by steam, undoubtedly the rotary form is the most convenient mode through which to apply it, and accordingly, both screws and paddle-wheels work advantageously, until the rolling or pitching motion of a ship becomes very violent, when great waste of power ensues; for instance, when a ship rolls so deeply that the paddles are alternately too deeply immersed, and spinning round in the air; or if a screw ship, when she pitches so much that the screw is raised to the water's surface, or lifted above it. When, therefore, it is considered how much more violent is the motion of a boat in a heavy broken sea than that of a ship, it will be readily conceived that a fixed machine, such as a wheel or screw, even if it could be worked on so small a scale by steam power, would do so at a still greater disadvantage. Whereas the oar, obedient to the quick eye and ready arm of the rower varies its position with every motion. of the boat or wave, and in skilful hands is always working at "full power."

But there is another point of importance not to be lost sight of. A paddle-wheel or screw cannot be worked in a lifeboat by steam power, but must be so by means of a crank worked by hand. Now it is known to everyone that the muscles of the human body are strengthened by use, and that, therefore, persons engaged in any particular bodily labour have those muscles especially strengthened that are constantly brought into play.

Thus, a sailor would stand little chance in a walking match with a professional pedestrian ; whilst the latter would as vainly attempt to overtake the former in a race over his ship's mast-head. It follows then, that, apart from its other advantages, the oar is possessed of this especial one, that is in daily use by the only class of men on the coasts who are available to form the lifeboats crew, viz., the hardy race of fishermen and boatmen who earn their daily bread on our shores.

An oar being, then, the only instrument by which a lifeboat can be propelled, too much care cannot be bestowed on it. Its size, weight, length, material, width of blade, balance, mode of attachment to the gunwale; its height above the water, and above the

thwart on which the rower is seated, and the distance of the thwarts and oars apart, are all points of much importance on which the speed of the boat, or its power to make way against a head-sea, much depend.

Fir oars have always been considered the most desirable for lifeboats, as they do not bend so much as ash oars, and as they float so much lighter in the water, and will therefore better support any persons in it in the event of accident. Experiments have been repeatedly made by the National Lifeboat Institution to test the relative strength of oars, when it was ascertained that an oar made from a good white Norway batten, or from a white Baltic spar, will bear as great a strain as any other, each being as free of knots as possible.

The length of an oar must of course be proportional to the width of the boat, and it should be so poised on the gunwale that the rower can raise or depress it or move it in any direction with the smallest effort. An oar should be not less than five inches wide in the blade, or it will expose so small a surface to the water as to cut through it, and so work on a too yielding fulcrum, with comparative loss of power.

The height above the thwarts, of the thowl or rowlock in which the oar works on the gunwale, should be sufficient to enable the rower to lift the blade well above the waves by depressing the loom or handle; but, on the other hand, it must not be so high as to require him to raise his arms above the level of his chest in rowing, in which case he will row with much less force, and be much sooner fatigued. A height of eight inches from the thwarts to the oar on the gunwale, will be found a suitable average.

Again the mode of confining the oar to the gunwale of the boat is of much consequence. The most common modes, in ordinary boats, are rowlocks and double pins, between which the oar works; but as the oar is liable to jamb in the rowlock or between the pins, when rowing in a rough sea, and thereby to get broken, or damage the gunwale, the oars of lifeboats have generally been worked in a rope grummet or ring, over a single iron thowl-pin; a further advantage of this plan being that it enables the oars to lie along the outside of the boat when not in use, and thus saves the necessity of unshipping them and getting them in board on going alongside a wreck, which is a great advantage.

A new description of swivel-crutch, intended as a substitute for a grummet, has recently been planned for the National Institution's Lifeboats, by its Inspector, Capt. J. R. Ward, R.N., which is found to have the advantages of the grummet, and to be more convenient in some respects.

As it will be found to be a very useful kind of crutch for general use in boats, we subjoin a sketch of it.

Figure 1, represents the inside of a boat's gunwale, with a section of the oar within the crutch, the latter supported on the