The Scientific American Supplement has the following to say in regard to the English dumdum bullets:—
“During the Chitral campaign of 1895, the Indian troops found that the nickel-covered leaden bullets of their Lee-Metford rifles were ineffective against living targets. The soldiers overcame this difficulty by stripping the bullet partially of its nickel jacket and exposing the ogival point of the head. These dumdum bullets, so named after the Dumdum Ammunition Works, at Calcutta, became distorted on striking a soft body and were torn apart, as shown in figure 1. The wounds produced by these half-covered bullets were found to be very serious. . . . The Geneva Convention, it is true, only prohibited the use of explosive bullets in small arms, but had the convention known of the terrible effect which could be produced by a bullet of the form described, mankind would undoubtedly have been protected from this new and fearful type of shot.”
Fig. 1.
“True it is, that completely jacketed bullets are comparatively harmless against living targets, since they merely pass through the body with but little injury. But it is not on that account necessary to employ these highly destructive, half-covered bullets with their expansible soft cores. Experiments should be made either with fully-covered shot having flattened heads or with an entirely new form of bullet, since a flatheaded projectile has too small an initial velocity for use in modern warfare. In the Kriegstechnische Zeitschrift, to which we are indebted for our illustrations and particulars, a writer proposes a construction similar to that shown in figure 2. In this proposed form, a core, a, a jacket, b, and a leaden cap, c, are used. The jacket, b, is formed with a contraction, d, which offers a firm hold for the leaden cap, c. The inventor of this bullet is of the opinion that a projectile of this type will lose nothing in velocity, and that upon striking a human body it will not be distorted to so great a degree as the half-covered dumdum bullet. By reason of the tapered head, e, a mushroom-like formation will result on impact, as shown in figure 3, and a rather large passageway will be produced without tearing apart the surrounding muscles so terribly as in the case of the half-jacketed bullet. A further advantage claimed for this shot is its high penetrating power, since the easily-demolished leaden cap readily permits the hardened head to protrude.”
It is painfully amusing to note the discussions in regard to just how barbarous a bullet can be without being put under the ban of belonging to “uncivilized warfare.” A bullet that explodes and tears the victim all to pieces will not do, for it is too barbarous, so the “civilized” warrior seems to think. And then a plain steel bullet will not do, for it merely cuts a clean hole through a man, and unless it strikes a vital part of his body it does him but very little injury. Hence a bullet must be invented that is not open to either of these objections.
Fig. 2. Fig. 3.
Why can not men see the absurdity of such sophistical reasonings, and recognize the fact that every form of war, and every form of bullet used in war, is uncivilized and barbarous. But so long as men want to fight, it is supposed that they will try to devise various means to make themselves think that they are civilized, while still doing uncivilized things. War belongs to savagery, and a mere change in the style of bullets used does not strip it of its barbarities.
