make such good shooting at ordinary distances, suited for the general sportsman, that it is difficult to beat; at the same time, as the Minié ball shoots stronger and with less elevation than the solid ball, the latter ought to be better for short, and must be better for very long ranges; and also if the bullet is judiciously made, there is no necessity for capsules being used at all,

To prove that the capsules occasionally fall out of the ball in their flight, I have brought several balls, in which the holes are much larger than the capsules, and which were picked up without them after firing, which corroborates what I was lately told by a party who had been firing at Woolwich, that they frequently picked them up half-way to the target. This may be owing to the balls fitting too loosely in the barrel. Were they made to fit a little better, this might not happen.

It may not be out of place to mention here, Mr President, that I think Government would have acted wisely had they tried the Minié principle of ball to their old rifle, and slightly rifled their present muskets, which are sufficiently strong for that purpose, before going to the expense of having entirely new ones made, as a very little depth of rifling is required to give a ball the necessary rotatory motion.

That the Minié principle for military purposes possesses great advantages of facility of loading cannot for a moment be doubted; at the same time the nearer the ball fits the calibre of the barrel, without the grooves being fitted until explosion takes place, the more regular will be the shooting.

As to the accounts we read of hitting a single man at 1400 or 1500 yards with any degree of certainty, before they can do that every gun will need a telescope fitted to it, and a different atmosphere to our own to shoot in, or very different sized men to shoot at, as few men could hold a gun steady enough to hit, supposing their eye-sight sufficiently good for them to see the object.

I shall now take my leave, Sir, by tendering to you and the gentlemen present my best thanks for your indulgent attention, as I fear I have detained you from more interesting subjects.

Since the reading of the foregoing paper, Government has adopted the ball here recommended without a capsule, and some thousands of old muskets have been rifled for the use of the navy.

Address by the President, DAVID STEVENSON, Esq., F.R.S.E., Civil Engineer; delivered November 14, 1853.

GENTLEMEN,

I have now to ask your indulgence while, in accordance with what has hitherto been the practice in our Society, I offer a few remarks for your consideration, in opening the Thirty-third Session of our Meetings.

Such opening addresses are, I believe, generally expected to embrace a statement of the progress of discovery, and of the improvements that have been effected in the various branches of the useful arts during the past Session. But, with the view of promoting the interests of our Society, it occurs to me that nothing brought forward in an address such as I have now the honour of submitting can be so useful as a simple narrative of what it has already done. Such a recital, by reminding the members of the Society of its history and efficiency, will tend to stimulate them to increased exertion in upholding it in all its usefulness and integrity; while I am sure that an account of what has been done cannot fail to convince authors of communications and inventions that great benefit may be derived from submitting to us the results of their labours for our consideration. I propose therefore, in accordance with these views, to confine my remarks this evening to a brief recapitulation of the history of our Society, embracing, in so far as its records enable me to do so, a short notice of its Institution-its Membership-its Transactions -and its Premiums.

It is believed that the idea of forming an Institution for the promotion of the Mechanical Arts in Edinburgh was conceived somewhere about the year 1819, and that Sir David Brewster, Sir John Robison, and Mr Guthrie Wright were chiefly

instrumental in bringing the proposal into notice. It appears, however, that a considerable period elapsed before the views of the projectors could be fully carried out. As happens in all such matters, difficulties occurred; and we may infer that it was in consequence of these difficulties that this Society was not formally instituted till the 9th July 1821, being two years after its organization was projected. Between July 1821 and March 1823, several meetings appear to have been held, chiefly for the purpose of discussing the arrangements for carrying on the business of the Society, and the best means of bringing it into notice; for the early minutes bear evident marks that the projectors of our Institution had many difficulties to contend with in recommending it to the public. These preliminary meetings were attended, among others, as the minutes shew, by Baron Clerk Rattray, Sir John Hay, Sir Walter Scott, Professor Hope, Principal Baird, Mr Thomas Allan, Mr Leonard Horner, Mr Bryson, Sir David Brewster, Mr Henry Jardine, Sir John Robison, Mr Robert Stevenson, Mr James Jardine, Mr Guthrie Wright, Professor Wallace, Mr James Milne, Mr Whitelaw, Mr L'Amy, and others. who, at that period, took an interest in the subject. It is worthy of remark, that one result of these preliminary meetings appears to have been the establishment of the present Edinburgh School of Arts, an institution which has been singularly successful in maintaining a course of instruction for the industrial classes by persons eminently qualified to discharge that duty. In the minutes of our Society of 27th August 1822, it is stated that on considering the expediency of carrying into effect the plan of disseminating useful knowledge amongst the industrious classes, the members resolved to establish permanent Schools of Arts in Edinburgh and in other towns; and in terms of this resolution arrangements were actually made with Dr Fyfe and Mr Galbraith to deliver lectures under the auspices of the Society of Arts during the winters of 1822 and 1823; but at a meeting held on 5th September 1822, the idea of establishing a School of Arts in connection with the Society was abandoned, for some reasons which the minutes do not explain. The present School of Arts was, however, organized immediately there

after and thus we are warranted in saying that the original idea of the Edinburgh School of Arts was propounded at the early meetings of this Society.

The meetings alluded to were, as I have stated, of a preliminary nature, and intended mainly for the purpose of determining the best method of carrying out the objects of the Society; but, early in 1823, they assumed the form of regular meetings for business, and in the month of March of that year we find, among other communications, that Professor Wallace read a paper on the Eidograph; Mr Ruthven on a new press for goods; and Dr Brewster on an improvement in the construction of table-lamps; so that the Society was then in actual operation. At that time, however, the meetings appear to have been held only occasionally when a sufficient number of communications were received; and it was not till January 1824, or five years after the first proposal for its organization, that the members resolved to hold regular evening meetings once a fortnight; and these meetings have, since that date, been continued without intermission.

In the year 1841 the Society obtained its Royal Charter of incorporation.

With reference to the constitution of the Society it may be stated, that at an early period of its history it was customary to elect an honorary president, and the Duke of Atholl, the Earl of Wemyss, the Earl of Hopetoun, Lord Melville, Lord John Campbell, Lord Gray, the Duke of Buccleuch, and the Marquis of Tweeddale, acted successively in that capacity. In 1836, however, the system was changed, and the present course of electing the president from among the working members was adopted. It occurs to me that it may be useful, in order more fully to illustrate the comprehensive nature of the object and aim of our Institution, and to shew the varied tastes and pursuits of those who from the first have taken an interest in its proceedings, to enumerate the names of the gentlemen who have presided over its meetings since its formation, including of course those who acted as vice-presidents under the old system, and who were virtually presidents of the Society. They are,―

Sir Samuel Shepherd, The Hon. Captain Napier, Sir George Clerk, Sir George M'Kenzie, Professor Russell, Mr L'Amy, Lord Newton, Lord Napier, Sir Thomas M. Brisbane, Sir John Robison, Mr Crawford, Mr Clerk Maxwell, Rev. Dr Gordon, Sir Thomas Dick Lauder, Mr Robert Stevenson, Mr James Jardine, Sir David Milne, Professor Forbes, Colonel Macdonald, Mr Edward Sang, Sir John Graham Dalzell, Mr Robert Bald, Professor Fyfe, Professor Traill, Professor More, Dr Maclagan, Mr George Buchanan, Mr Cay, Mr Grainger, and Dr Lees. It may further be interesting to state, that the office of secretary has been held successively by Sir John Robison, Mr Guthrie Wright, Professor Wallace, Professor Turner, Mr Aytoun, and our present esteemed secretary, Mr Tod, who has held the office for nearly twentyseven years; while the Rev. Dr Gordon, Dr Patrick Neill, Mr Crawford, Mr Alexander Adie, and Mr Ponton, have successively acted as foreign secretaries.

It seems only natural to expect that the communications made to a Society whose leading men were theologians, philosophers, engineers, lawyers, and sailors, persons engaged in pursuits so widely different, and who were all, nevertheless, so interested in its welfare as to preside over its meetings, should embrace a very wide field of research, and include a vast variety of topics connected with the arts and sciences; and this expectation, I can confidently affirm, is fully borne out by our printed Transactions.

In order, however, to illustrate, even in a very imperfect degree, the varied character and the great importance of the communications which have been made, I shall, chiefly for the information of those to whom our Transactions are not accessible, venture to name a few of the communications for which premiums or votes of special thanks have been awarded, although I have felt that in attempting to make such enumeration, it is impossible even to approach to a satisfactory selection.

It is interesting and pleasing, however, to be able to introduce my remarks on this subject by stating, that the first premium which the Society appears to have awarded was given to the late distinguished Professor Wallace for his