|
|
|
16. Associates
Josiah Vavasseur (1834 - 1908) Vavasseur was born at Braintree, Essex, in 1834, and died at Thetford, Norfolk, on the November 13, 1908, aged 74. At the time of his death he was a director of Sir W. G. Armstrong, Whitworth and Company, and had been responsible for many important improvements in various branches of ordnance. He served an engineering apprenticeship to James Horn, of 14 High Street, Whitechapel, London, a maker of steam engines and machinery, and subsequently started to work on his own account in Southwark. Vavasseur first comes to notice in 1857 when he set up in business at 17 New Park Street, Southwark, with David Guthrie as the Patent Dyewood & Drug Mills. He had secured the patent for a machine for “cutting, chipping or rasping dyewoods... for the purpose of obtaining extracts”, in that year. He continued in that line until 1860 when he was in business as Josiah Vavasseur & Company, engineers, 8 Sumner Street, Southwark. Next door was Henry Vavasseur & Company, galvanized iron and zinc works, 9 Sumner Street, Southwark, clearly a relative.
In that year he took over a small iron works at 28 Gravel Lane, Southwark between Gravel Lane and Bear Lane, and secured a patent, numbered 1,933, dated August 3, 1861 for a “new or improved transportable machine or apparatus for rifling cannon”. This is how he and Blakely became connected.
Vavasseur Transportable Rifling Machine 1861 The machine was described in August 1861 as being capable of rifling cannon, howitzers and mortars. It was in two parts, the rifling machine, a three girder iron bed with a muzzle chuck at one end and the drive for the rifling tap at the other, fitted with wheels, powered manually or by steam; and a separate iron carriage to hold the gun barrel.
“The machine is capable of rifling all guns from 2.5 inches to 11 inches bore, with any number or shape of grooves, and with any twist. Some guns of Captain Blakely’s, exceeding by half an inch the bore of the largest Armstrong, and weighing nearly four tons, were rifled by one of these machines in about seven hours, including the time taken to adjust the gun.”
As well as at Vavasseur’s new works they were already in service with the Russian ordnance and one was on order for the Turkish government in August 1861. 
Vavasseur advertising his new rifling machine in the Times newspaper, October 14, 1861
J Vavasseur & Company of 28 Gravel Lane, Southwark, manufactured small cannon for Captain Blakely in 1862 and were making spherical steel shot for great guns in 1863. During 1863 the works were acquired and extended by Captain Blakely and his partner, John Dent, Vavasseur becoming manager and engineer to the Blakely Ordnance Company, as an employee. James Vavasseur, a silk merchant of stature in London, and Josiah’s elder brother, may have made the fatal introduction between Alexander Blakely and John Dent, the China merchant, who financed Blakely’s operations from 1863.
London Ordnance Works, J Vavasseur & Co Offices at Bear Lane c.1880 Picture courtesy Southwark Local History Library It should be said that Vavasseur’s Gravel Lane works and Blakely’s Bear Lane works occupy the same site. Gravel Lane is a long road, with at least two Number 28s, re-numbering and the effect of immense railway and road building in the area have confused the location. No 28 had been a timber yard from 1820 until the early-1850s, when it first became an iron works. Before Vavasseur took it over, in 1858 the site was temporarily occupied by the well-known hydraulic engineering firm of Easton & Amos of The Grove, Southwark, to make and test the paying-out gear for the Atlantic telegraph cable. It was only after the ordnance factory was extended south in 1863 to obtain better access did it become No 1 Bear Lane, Southwark. Gravel Lane now has the somewhat more dignified title of Great Suffolk Street, of which it occupies the upper or northern extremity.
In 1860 Josiah Vavasseur became, or rather was elected, a member of the Honourable Artillery Company in the City of London, the oldest establishment of military volunteers in the country. He was a member of the Artillery Detachment, which actually worked its battery of field guns. The bulk of its several hundred members, city merchants and civil servants, “served” in its Foot or Light Infantry Companies. It was not an honour that Captain Blakely achieved. In July 1866, just as the collapse of the Blakely concern was occurring he patented “Improvements in compressors or apparatus for receiving and absorbing the recoil of guns and other ordnance”. This set of innovations in gun carriages for large-scale ordnance was to prove almost as valuable as any improvement in artillery. Vavasseur succeeded to and continued the ordnance works in Southwark in 1867. He continued the manufacture of large cannon for export, but on a much smaller scale than Blakely, merely finishing the forgings made by Thomas Firth & Son in Sheffield. His major work was in improving and making gun carriages. However Vavasseur also produced several varieties of torpedoes or submarine mines in the 1870s. One of his principal collaborators was Captain Charles Ambrose McEvoy, formerly of the Confederate States Navy, who from 1866 devised and patented electric fuses and developed spar and drift torpedoes from models used in the late war. On February 22, 1883 Josiah Vavasseur joined Sir W G Armstrong & Company in Newcastle-upon-Tyne as one their managing directors. 
9 inch “Blakely”, 250 pounder, steel gun made for Peru, delivered by Vavasseur in 1867 Now preserved at the Museo del Morro de Arica on a modern display carriage Robert Scott (1817 - 1903) Commander Robert Anthony Edwards Scott RN, based on researches started early in 1859, published his own system of ordnance in 1861. One of his principles was the so-called “centrical” or ratchet rifling, in which three or more single-sided grooves were cut in the bore. It was his plan to economically “make available, as rifled guns, the large quantity of cast-iron ordnance in store” with the Royal Navy. In his own words, it was a “method of rifling iron and brass muzzle and breech loading guns so as to fire common round shot without impairing their accuracy or injuring the gun, which may be sponged and loaded with as much facility as smooth-bore guns”. Experiments with his system began early in 1860, and he exhibited a sea-service 32 pounder gun, the commonest piece in the navy, rifled on his “centrical” principle, along with an entirely new cast-iron elongated shot and shell, at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1862. In the summer of 1861 at Shoeburyness one of his converted 32 pounders had been fired over 300 times without injury, the most that a cast-iron gun had done with elongated shot, before bursting after three increased charges. Scott decided that such cast-iron guns required breech-reinforcement. 
8 inch Scott projectiles for his “centrical” rifling Cast-iron with rails or flanges cast into the body A flat-nosed solid bolt at top, a shell at bottom, fired with base wadding Pictures courtesy Tom Dickey
Scott’s “centrical” principle was then adopted, with the endorsement of the inventor, by Alexander Blakely in rifling his early great guns. Blakely later developed this into his own “ratchet” or “saw-tooth” rifling which was patented in 1863. Scott’s rifling was intended to use his unusual railed or flanged projectiles, which were double-ended, with rounded noses and bases, requiring substantial wadding at the breech end. The flanged projectiles were only used with the early versions of “centrical” rifling, with three or four triangular grooves, such as the 8 inch Blakely Low Moor converted guns provided in 1862 for the Confederate States. The later multiple triangular grooved rifling required a bolt or shell with an expanding base, such as Bashley Britten’s or Blakely’s own projectile of 1863. Scott projectiles, with their unique side ribs, have been recovered in the United States in three sizes: for 4.5 inch rifles with three flanges, 4.36 inches diameter by 10 inches length, weighing 21 pounds at Fort Fisher, Wilmington; for 8 inch rifles with three flanges, 7.90 inches diameter by 14.12 inches length, 168 pounds weight, at Fort Fisher and at Fort Morgan, Mobile; and for the 13 inch rifles with four flanges, 12.75 inches diameter by 20.25 inches length for 650 pound flat-ended bolts and 23 inches length, 475 pounds weight, for round-nosed shells. The 13 inch shell was also made in Charleston with four inset copper flanges rather than cast-in ribs as imported from England.
Commander R A E Scott RN was born in Egg Buckland, near the seaport of Plymouth, Devon, in 1819, and was married to Fanny Mary Julian at Plymouth in 1860. He entered the Royal Navy on May 1, 1830 and was commissioned Lieutenant RN on May 17, 1842, receiving the rank of Commander on July 28, 1848 and Captain on November 22, 1866. He retired from the Royal Navy in 1870. He had during 1866 obtained several patents for projectiles, manoeuvring guns and for gun carriages. At the hearings of the Ordnance Committee of Parliament in 1863 he proved a vociferous, even belligerent, witness against the existing system of gun procurement, which had blocked development of his own, Bashley Britten’s and Alexander Blakely’s improvements, on both of which he spoke positively. It is not immediately clear whether Commander Scott, is the same as, or is related to, Robert Scott of 53 Great Portland Street, St Marylebone, termed “gunmaker” in the 1861 census, and who obtained Patent 3,166, dated December 18, 1861, “for rifling and grooving the barrels of firearms and ordnance”. There is no evidence that R A E Scott personally patented either the “centrical” rifling system or his flanged projectiles. The elongated flanged projectile for rifled ordnance had been previously described by the then Lieutenant David Davidson of the Bombay Army in the Honourable East India Company’s Service in a paper entitled “Rifled Cannon” presented to the Royal Society of Edinburgh by Professor Charles Piazzi Smyth as early as 1839. Davidson is better known for his military telescopic sight for rifles, used by the Confederate States, which he had first experimented with in India in 1832, exhibited in London in 1851 and finally patented in 1862. Commander Scott did however patent several improvements in ordnance and gun mountings in 1866 on leaving the Royal Navy. He was married to Madeline Bowes, they had several sons together. and later emigrated to New Zealand. He was a direct relation of Robert Falcon Scott, the explorer of the Antarctic.
Scott’s “Centrical” Rifling and his Shell with three longitudinal “rails” or flanges to grip the rifling Bashley Britten (1825 - 1882) The most common projectiles used in Blakely guns were manufactured to Bashley Britten’s patent of 1855: these had lead skirts, termed “an envelope of lead”, sweated on to the base of oval-nosed, elongated cylindrical iron bolts. Britten’s later fragmentation shell of 1861 was an ingenious device moulded from the inside outward; the companion percussion fuse was less successful. Bashley Britten’s original projectile patent from which he developed his range of fragmentation shells dated from 1855, the same year as Alexander Blakely’s initial patent. After obtaining provisional protection for the design as patent 604/1855, it was finally numbered 1740/1855, signed on August 8, 1855. Six years later he improved the elongated shell with internal segmentation and added a fuse design, protecting these changes in patent number 585/1861, of March 8, 1861. 
Bashley Britten’s Patent Elongated Shell 1855 The first version, demonstrating the lead skirt or base flange, with solid fore-body and a common wood fuse
Bashley Britten’s association with ordnance seems to have commenced in 1854 when he was employed by the large engineering concern of Maudslay, Sons & Field of Lambeth in London. This was a substantial firm, one of the few engaged in making steam engines for the Royal Navy, as well as providing mill machinery, pumps and an immense variety of high quality engineering materials. It was at Maudslay’s that many great mechanical engineers were initially apprenticed, including Joseph Whitworth.
During 1854, as the Crimean War with Russia started, Joseph Maudslay, the managing partner, designed and patented his own breech-loading gun, as well as making rifling machines and ordnance stores for the government. Britten may have assisted in this work. In November 1854 Bashley Britten approached the War Office with his concept of a new shell-firing gun, using rifled cast-iron ordnance. This he stated would improve performance immeasurably – longer range, greater payload and great economy; the latter through the simple conversion of existing cast-iron pieces by rifling. Britten’s underlying principle was that muzzle-loading cast-iron guns need only be rifled with very shallow grooves, thought safer than deep rifling, if a shell or shot could be designed that would grip such grooves. As it turned out his ingenious shell design was the invention that made his name, being suitable for all manner of muzzle-loading rifled ordnance. The shells were tried three times by the War Office on the Shoeburyness artillery range in 1855, in March, on July 26 and again on October 24 and 25. The gun was “an ordinary 9-pounder iron field piece of 17 cwt with four grooves cut down the bore”, that is, for clarification, a 4.2 inch gun weighing 1,904 pounds. The usual charge for a 9 pounder ball was 3 pounds of powder, giving a maximum range of 2,400 yards.
In all of the tests the Britten shell and the “9 pounder” rifled gun exceeded the range of the existing gun by 1,000 yards, the shell it fired weighed 14½ pounds and required just 1¾ pounds of propellant. In the later trials the shell weight was increased to 16 pounds and still retained the same increased performance and economy.
The first Britten shells carried a bursting charge twice as much as the common shell but cost, he said, only 15% per ton more to make. In balance there was a saving of 50% in propellant.
This information comes from Bashley Britten’s letters that appeared in ‘The Times’ newspaper in August and October 1855, dated from the offices of Maudslay, Sons & Field. The official report was not published.
Britten’s patent process for securing lead to iron using an intermediate coat of zinc during the manufacture of bolts for rifled guns was licensed to the War Office in 1860 for £500. It was used in all of the government-made projectiles for breech-loaders, as well as those in Prussia and Russia.
He accompanied this with a design for improved rifling of cannon, also used by Blakely. Britten’s rifling was usually termed at the time “square”, being also shallow and sharp-edged, with several grooves. He did not patent, or attempt to patent, his shallow rifling. It was used interchangeably with Scott’s pattern in Blakely’s earliest guns.
In the early 1860s Britten proposed and vigorously tested his own system of ordnance; taking the existing cast-iron tubes of the 32 pounder and 68 pounder smooth bore pieces and having them rifled to his specification. The regular 32 pounder cost £58 to cast and £1 to rifle, as compared to the cost of £360 for the government’s latest 40 pounder wrought-iron breech-loader. The powder charge was reduced from 10 pounds to five pounds, but the shot weight was now 50 pounds and the range increased from 1,882 yards to 2,100 yards. There were similar improvements in the 68 pounder. As noted above, Britten also had rifled 9 pounder cast-iron field guns, which were then capable of throwing a 15 pound bolt. All three types proved safe and durable, but were ignored by the War Office. None of Bashley Britten’s guns were “strengthened”, as in Blakely’s system, but were simply rifled, cast-iron service pieces.
In all, two “Britten” simple cast-iron 9 pounders were rifled and tested in 1855 by the War Office; and four 32 pounders and three 68 pounders were rifled and tried between 1856 and 1861, primarily during 1860. Early in 1859 Britten wrote to Captain Blakely proposing that they co-operate in making strengthened cast-iron guns rifled on his model to more effectively compete with William Armstrong’s monopoly. Blakely welcomed this approach and was to adopt Britten’s rifling. The Confederate States’ purchasing agent, Caleb Huse, then in London described Bashley Britten’s patent shell to General Gorgas in Richmond in a letter written on May 21, 1861:
“I was shown this morning a new segment shell, invented by Mr Breton [Britten]. It appears to be possessed of all the advantages of the Armstrong against troops, and is much more simple and less expensive. The exterior is of cast-iron, of the shape of the projectiles used in the [Blakely] gun sent by Mr Prioleau to Charleston, and which was used in the bombardment. It is made as thin as possible not to be broken in the gun. Inside the shell is a second shell, made in segments, also of cast-iron. There are nine of these segments, each of which consists of six parts, or rather each of which will easily break into six parts. Thus A is one of the segments, made of brittle cast-iron; c, c, and c, are disks of sheet-iron, around which the cast-iron is poured. The cast-iron does not adhere to the cold wrought-iron, and the segment when taken from the mould is an arch, the voussoirs of which are of cast-iron. These voussoirs are connected at the back, the wrought-iron partitions not coming quite through to the back of the arch.”
“Nine of these segments are placed together, forming a body, the exterior orifice of which is to fit the interior of the outer shell. The interior space is filled with sand. This mass of segments and sand forms the core of the shell. A mould is now made, and the shell completed as if an ordinary sand-core had been used. It is evident that the shell is very strong to resist pressure from the exterior, but very weak in the opposite direction. The principle may be applied to projectiles for either muzzle-loading or breech-loading guns. When used for muzzle-loaders, the same arrangement is adopted by Mr Breton [Britten] as in the case of the projectiles for the Blakely gun [i.e. lead skirts].” 
Bashley Britten’s Patent Elongated Shell and Fuse 1861 The second version, with lead skirt, internal segmental construction and metallic percussion fuse Britten was no partisan. In June and July 1861 he was treating with General J C Frémont’s agent in London to provide shot and shell for the Union armies in the Mid-West. A production license, along with patterns and moulds, for his projectiles was also sought for use in the United States. Several thousand Britten patent shells were sent from England to Frémont in St Louis during the summer of that year. Large numbers of Bashley Britten’s lead-skirted iron shells were manufactured in a great many calibres. He went to some pains to keep the source of supply of his shell bodies and fuses secret from his customers. However there is no reason to believe otherwise than that all of his patent shells were manufactured between 1855 and 1864 at the famous engineering works of his employers, Maudslay, Sons & Field, of 108-110 Westminster Bridge Road, Lambeth, London, under license.
It should be said that Britten patent shells could be and were used in rifled cannon other than Alexander Blakely’s. There is no correlation of use one to the other. Relics found in the United States have been measured at 2.5 inches, 2.9 (or 3) inches, 3.5 inches, 6.4 inches and 7 inches, as well as “32 pounds” (6.4 inch?), “24 pounds” (4 inch?) and “12 pounds” (4.62 inch?). Apart from the 3.5 inch and 7 inch calibres none can, with certainty, be said to be from Blakely guns. Dimensions for measured Britten projectiles recovered in the United States are for the 7 inch rifle; 6.9 inches diameter by 11.75 inches length, 88 pounds bolt weight, 64 pounds shell weight: for the 6.4 inch rifle (or “32 pounder” rifle), 6.35 inches diameter by 11 inches length, 56 pound bolt weight, 46 pound shell weight: for the 4.62 inch rifle (or “12 pounder” rifle), 4.56 inches diameter by 7.33 inches length, 26 pound bolt weight, 21 pound shell weight. The 6.4 inch projectiles have been found at Wilmington, Charleston and Mobile. Eason Brothers of Charleston, who also repaired the 13 inch Blakely gun in 1863, attempted to manufacture Britten shells for the Confederate States but were unable to get the lead skirts to adhere to the iron bodies – possibly not being aware of the need to use a zinc intermediary, the basis of his patent. Alexander Dyer also failed in his imitation or piracy of Britten’s patent shells despite gaining large contracts from the Washington government during 1862, for the same reason. Belatedly, given their wide use by both sides in the recent war, in June 1871, Britten secured a patent in the United States, number 116,408, for his lead-skirted projectiles. Most curiously the specification was based on the shell in his British patent of 1855 rather than the segmented version of 1861.
Bashley Britten’s Patent Shell 1871 From the Specification of U S Patent 116,408 Bashley Britten was a civil engineer by profession, though styling himself in the Census and in his patent documents as a ‘gentleman’. He was the son of Daniel Britten, a clothworker, of Walthamstow in Middlesex and of the City of London. The father and mother, Jane Britten, and their estates subsequently, were involved in a long and discreditable bankruptcy suit that lasted from 1824 until 1861, which probably accounts for Britten’s secrecy as regards his background. It is known that he had four elder brothers, Daniel Mallet, Charles Francis, William Goodwyn Price and James Edward, as well as two sisters, Jane and Alicia Georgiana. Bashley Britten was born in Christchurch, Hampshire in 1825, and died at Ullapool on Loch Broom in the Highlands of Scotland in 1882. He was involved in diverse and original engineering work, particularly in relation to the working of metals from around 1854. His later inventions included the manufacture of glass from foundry slag. For much of his life Britten lived in the county of Surrey, south of London, initially, in 1854, at Anerley, near Sydenham, then from 1864 at Redhill and Reigate. He married Susannah Wilks in April 1853 and they had one daughter, Ada Elizabeth.
Blakely employed William Goodwyn Price Britten on May 14, 1861 to work for the Blakely Cannon Company in Liverpool to develop improvements in shells for his pieces, with Fawcett, Preston & Company. WGP Britten was elder brother to Bashley Britten, and had been imprisoned for debt several times. The appointment was not a success, ending in a law suit. WGP Britten was to receive a salary of £200 a year and a commission of 12s 0d on every ton of shells, but succeeded only in spending large sums on iron, lead and other materials in experiments. It is likely that this led to an estrangement between Bashley Britten and Blakely in 1862.
Bashley Britten’s short book of 1871, comparing his system with others, Heavy Rifled Ordnance, makes no reference at all to Blakely. Bashley Britten’s Patents: 394 February 18, 1854 Crushing Ore 6 January 2, 1855 Copying apparatus 604 March, 17, 1855 Projectiles* 1740 August 1, 1855 Projectiles 567 March 1, 1860, Projectiles* 585 March 8, 1861 Projectiles 1856 July 26, 1864 Projectiles 855 March 12, 1868 Manure 3528 November 20, 1868 Fishing Rods 731 March 10, 1869 Whips 715 March 17, 1871 Artillery 3750 November 19, 1873 Glass 4017 November 19, 1875 Glass 2105 May 18, 1876 Glass
* Only provisional patents, not completed 
Britten’s Shallow “Square” Rifling and Britten’s Shell with a lead skirt or flange and a wooden sabot at the base John Dent (1822 - 1892) The failure of the Blakely Ordnance Company must be laid at the door, the impressive mansion port cochère in fact, of John Dent, merchant, of 35 Grosvenor Square, London, England; and of Pedder Street, Hong Kong, the Bund, Shanghai and Foo Chow Foo, in the Empire of China. Born in 1822 in the “East Indies”, probably in Canton, China, he was the senior partner in the firm of Dent & Company of Hong Kong, merchants dealing in tea, silk, indigo and opium since 1823, and which comprised John Dent, Francis Chomley, Henry Dent, Alexander Turing and H P Hanssen. The firm’s business was estimated in the London press in the 1860s to turn over two to three millions sterling. Dent himself was represented as worth £800,000. It was one of three original “Hongs” or trading firms in Canton. It was Dent’s opium “stash” in its Canton godown or warehouse that was condemned by the Chinese authorities and started the Opium Wars of the 1840s.
John Dent had returned to London in 1863 with a “frank, confiding disposition” and his ostensible wealth, aged 41. He became the “favourite of fortune” in London society, building a mansion house in Grosvenor Square, contending the Parliamentary seat of Totnes in Devon, being elected to a half-dozen of the most fashionable clubs. It was said in the more vulgar newspapers that John Dent had fled China in fear of his life, leaving his partners to face the Tai’ping insurrection that terrorised the Empire in the early 1860s. There is no record as to how or why Alexander Blakely and John Dent became partners in the original Blakely Ordnance Company of 1863. There was a binding deed of partnership between them by which Dent financed Blakely’s work to the extent of £30,000. It can only be presumed that Dent, Palmer & Company, the London house associated with the China Dents and with a history of finding finance for the southern states over a period of twenty years, made the introduction.
John Dent also invested in joint-stock companies, lending his impressive name to their boards of directors in 1865. The most prominent of these was the Blakely Ordnance Company; another was Reuter’s Telegram Company, the famous news-agency, as well as participating in the creation of the Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation.
Both Dent and Blakely had taken debentures in the new limited company rather than being paid cash as the price of the good will, the contracts and the works of the old partnership. Between June and August 1865 Dent sold, discounted and mortgaged as many of his debenture bonds as possible. Blakely, too, had used his share as security for bank loans, always, it was acknowledged in the Courts, leaving a substantial margin between what he borrowed and the market value of the bonds. Dent’s needs were more pressing, his “running costs” were enormous, he had speculated in the booming stock market of the post 1862 period, and the trading business in China on which he based his life-style was perilous, if not insolvent.
Mysteriously, in August 1865 John Dent returned to Hong Kong, abandoning his house, his clubs and his social whirl. There were it was said huge losses in Dent & Company’s China trade; a shortfall of £200,000 in Shanghai was conveniently blamed on the criminal acts of a Portuguese employee. The collapse of the London financial market in April 1866 reverberated around the globe, bringing down banks in India and China, and, eventually, the house of Dent. Even so John Dent managed to use his family influence to be appointed a member of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong on August 15, 1866.
On November 8, 1866 Dent & Company’s agents in London refused to accept its bills.
The personal loans that Dent had negotiated in London on the security of the Blakely bonds fell due, then overdue, and the Blakely Ordnance Company, by then in the hands of hollow men and speculators, was unable to honour them. Neither was Blakely, whose name also appeared on their face. Nothing came from China.
Dent & Company, merchants, of London, Hong Kong, Shanghai and Foo Chow were bankrupt. Despite their much vaunted wealth, the partners proposed on May 8, 1867 to satisfy their creditors with a composition payment of just 2s 6d in the pound (12½ %) payable over two-and-half years from June 30, 1867. The offer was accepted.
On June 4, 1869, John Dent crept back into London, to a modest hotel, where he acknowledged his massive debts in writing to the Court of Bankruptcy. He chose not to appear before the Court in person. As a bankrupt and levanter he survived on the good-will of his wealthy family, living at his uncle’s modest house at No 8 Fitzroy Square, St Pancras, in London until his death in 1892.
Richmond, Virginia 1865 Two giant Scott flanged shells, next to a 3 inch Whitworth bolt, on an ordnance litter
| |
|