Democratic Sentinel, Volume 17, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 May 1893 — ARMOR FOR SOLDIERS. [ARTICLE]

ARMOR FOR SOLDIERS.

American Officers Take Little Stock 111 the Alleged lltillol-I'roof Uniforms. A series of experiments with so-called bullot-proof uniforms has recently been made at Vienna. Dowe, a tailor, is the Inventor of the. new armor. llis idea is that soldiers should wear in action a bullet proof, flexible composition, faced with cloth, and buttoned over or under tho uniform, lie claims that steel-faced bullets from modern rifles have failed to penetrate the stuff at any distance over 100 metres. At loss than 200 metres the shock of a bullet might render a mau clad in the armor unconscious. Whatever may be the real value of tho invention, it is certain that a Berlin firm has offered Herr Dowe an enormous sum for the patent. Major General Howard, of the United States Army, does not believe that armor will be introduced into modern warfare during the next two decades at least. '“For years,” he said, “wo have been told of experiments of this nature being made. They are favorably commented upon at the outset, but prove failures eventually and are forgotten. The last important hi ttlo in which armor figured was Waterloo. You remember the results there? Napoleon’s steel-clad cuirassiers were simply cut to pieces by tho English. Their armor proved no protection whatever, and although tho English and Prussians lmd armored troops on the field they kept them almost entirely out of the action. There is nothing in the law of nations prohibiting the use of armor. I fancy there will never be nny need for tho insertion of such u clause. Tho chief objections to armor are easily summed up, If the armor bo strong enough to be really bullet-proof it is sure to be too heavy for marching. If it bo light enough for inarching it cannot be strong enough to adequately resist bullets. With regard to Ilerr lJowc’s invention, I am inclined to think that it is an improvement on the invention of Herr Karl Seamed, which was tested in several countries some years ago. Searned’s armor was of undressed hemp, stitohed together and put under hydraulic pressure. It was thoroughly tested, and found to lie useless iu time of war. The I)owc invention is probably the same stuff, with the addition of u wire netting." General Howard was asked if any branch of tho American army hud ever worn armor, aud he unswerecl: “Some regiments of Federal troops during the Civil War tried chain armor. It did not turn out to bo a success, and was soon abandoned.” Said Lieutenant H. Bean, IT* S. A. cx-Govcrumcnt Instructor to State Militias:

“ Should armor or a modification of armor, ever be re-introduced, the art of war will be revolutionized, Candidly. I do not anticipate any such event. I witnessed the tests made with the Seamed armored uniform. Seamed exhibited his hempen material with bullets twisted in its meshes, yet -when the urmor was placed on a sheep the animal was killed by an ordinary rifle bullet, tired from a distance of somewhat over 100 metres. Armor of any kind would be cumbersome to infantry soldiers. Armor of this kind would be of no use whatever against the bayonot. The cavnlrymen might wear armor advantageously enough. If it bo introduced at all 1 should think that the experiment would be made with the mounted branch of the service." The Seamed armored inatcriul was made to be worn under the uniform. It covered the entire body, saving only the bands, feet and face. Ileing quite light, it admitted of the free movement of tho muscles. The armor was made in throe pieces, which overlapped each other and were secured together by hooks.