CHAPTER XX

THE ARMY AS IT IS

Few changes have been made in the drill or man?uvres of the army since 1880, except in the direction of reducing the number of the latter, and simplifying and giving freedom of action in the former. Greater attention is now paid to practical instruction, and to the value of continued training in marching, coupled with care for the soldiers’ feet, after the day’s march, and clothing. Thus the truth of Wellington’s remark is recognised, that “battles are as much won by feet as by arms.”

Examinations for promotion are more searching, selection for appointments to command the rule rather than the exception; while every possible care is taken to ensure the retention of men who know their work. Sir Evelyn Wood bears evidence that “in tactical skill, officers of all ranks have improved to a very great degree; but the improvement in military spirit, in eagerness to learn, and to submit cheerfully to great physical discomforts is even more remarkable, and this spirit reacts naturally on the lower ranks.”

The armament of all arms is altering. In the cavalry the front ranks of all heavy and medium regiments are armed with the lance, as well as sword and carbine, and only the hussars retain the two latter for both ranks. Every effort is being made to lighten the enormous weight a cavalry horse has to carry.

The artillery re-armed with a steel breech-loading, chambered, 12-pounder gun, has a very high velocity, and hence a very flat trajectory. This, for many purposes admirable, lessens the “searching” effect of artillery fire, and397 in foreign armies howitzer batteries and even field-mortar batteries are being experimented on.

Quick-firing guns are openly advocated for field service, and high explosives will render iron or steel turrets and stone fortifications both vulnerable, and dangerous to the defenders. Of late years, not only has Shoeburyness continued its useful work as the great centre of experimental work with large and small guns, but Okehampton has been utilised as a practice-ground for field artillery under conditions approximating to those of actual war.

The use of smokeless powder has changed in many ways the tactical application of the three arms. It is no longer easy to estimate exactly the extent of front of a battery of guns, nor even its exact position, nor can the fact of its fire being diminished by loss be so readily ascertained as when the smoke gave the information wanted. So, throughout the field generally, there is no smoke screen to hide the assailants from view, and greater exposure may involve more serious loss in attack. Similarly, the length of the enemy’s line of battle, and the extent to which it is occupied, will so far perplex the attacking commander, that unnecessarily wide turning movements may be expected, with consequent loss of time. Furthermore, the friction caused by the velocity of the cordite gas, with its naturally chemically corrosive action, tends to destroy barrels, and so render, earlier than heretofore, the weapon inaccurate. As regards the infantry, they have been armed with a Lee-Mitford small-bore rifle, with a calibre of ·303 inch, and having a muzzle velocity with cordite of 2000 feet a second, and a consequent range of 1900 yards. The long bayonet has been replaced by a short dagger, not unlike the first pattern of “plug-bayonet” which fitted into the muzzle of the arquebus. The weapon has an extremely flat trajectory, but it is improbable that the small diameter of the bullet would stop an Arab rush unless it found its billet in a vital part. Its penetration into wood is such that simple stockades, or even old brick walls, would be vulnerable before the new rifle. The number of rounds carried in the magazine is ten. Much stress is now398 laid on “field-firing” against targets with unknown ranges, arranged as far as possible under service conditions.

Long-ranged fire, even up to 3000 mètres, has been tried in France, but in England there is a tendency, with many officers, to deprecate the use of small-arm ammunition at extreme ranges.

The general direction of the improvement in firearms is to lessen the size of the bore and increase the flatness of the trajectory. Thus the high-angled fire of the Snider, converted from the muzzle-loading Enfield, was changed for the Martini-Henry, in every way a more deadly weapon, and this, as has been already remarked, has given way to an even smaller bored rifle. And with the increased rapidity of fire and the larger number of rounds of the lighter ammunition that can be carried, the bayonet, that was lengthened in 1878, was reduced to its present dimensions.

Muzzle-loading guns have been replaced by breech-loaders, and the steel muzzle-loading guns used in Abyssinia by screw guns, which can be put together and fired within a minute from the time the two mules, which carry the parts, halt.

Machine guns, such as the Gatling, Gardner, and Nordenfeldt, will probably give way to the automatic Maxim.

Since the campaign of 1870 to 1871, greater attention has been paid to visual signalling by flag or flash, and the field telegraph is much more actively employed, and accompanies, as far as possible, the army up to the point of attack.

In England, considerable attention has been paid to night marching and night attacks, as being the only method under favourable circumstances of crossing, unseen, the fire-swept zone now so much more extended than formerly.

Balloons, captive and free, form part of the equipment of an army corps, and officers are trained both in their use and in reconnoitring from them. They were employed in the operations round Suakin, but are difficult to manage in windy weather, as they found on that occasion.

Uniform has altered little, but helmets were issued in 1877 to all but Highland and Fusilier Regiments; and since that date the Rifle headdress has been restored, as well as399 the peculiar shako of the Highland Light Infantry. Badge and rank chevrons were formerly worn by all light infantry regiments on both arms, but this was abandoned, though the old 43rd still wore them up to 1881.72 The abolition of purchase in 1872 rendered the army possibly more professional, but certainly not, as was imagined, less expensive. It destroyed, however, the “right” claimed by officers who had purchased to different treatment from that which would naturally follow under a non-purchase system. Curiously enough, the alteration was hardest on the poor man who rose from the ranks, as he, on his retirement, frequently received a large sum for the “regulation” and “over regulation” price of his commission.
* * * * *

But the two greatest changes have been the introduction of short service, and the territorialisation of the regiments of the army; both of which measures have opponents as well as friends.

There is much misconception about the former, certainly. Its enemies quite forget that there was practically no alternative, that we are living in the end of the nineteenth century, not the beginning. The so-called Long Service Act of 1847, with its ten years’ service for the first period with the colours, and the right, if of good character, to extend it to twenty-one years for pension, did not provide sufficient recruits for a meagre army, and, as the Crimea proved, gave not only an insufficient number of men, but no reserves at all. When peace was signed, we had boy soldiers in the ranks much as we have now, many of the older men having perished; yet they fought well, as they always have done. Outside the first line there were foreign legions and militia,400 and that was all. The times even then were past since an army of 25,000 men was considered a respectable command for a serious European war; and the change in the conditions is even greater now, with all Europe an armed camp, and the armies themselves counting as many thousands as they did hundreds “when George the Third was king.” Nor was the longer service Act of 1867 any better. It gave twelve years with the colours and nine of re-engaged time to obtain pension. But the army then was more under its proper strength annually than before.

The plain fact is, that an army of even the dimensions of our own cannot attract a sufficient number of recruits for so long a period as ten or twelve years. You can get enough men to do so for a force a few thousands strong, like the Royal Marine Corps, but not for an army which has to put in fifteen or sixteen years in such climates as some parts of India or Burmah.

Short service was inevitable, and since its introduction the army has rarely, I believe never, been below its numerical strength. The question of reserves, important as that is, and of good non-commissioned officers is quite beside the question. Neither would be worth a row of pins without a sufficient number of men, however young, in the ranks. Besides, if serious war comes, the same method will be adopted that was in vogue in the much-belauded long service days. Battalions were weeded then as they are now, and though they had permanently a larger proportion of older men in the ranks to stiffen the regiments, the same stiffening can always be got from the reserves whenever it is wanted. Our previous system gave us nothing, absolutely nothing, to fall back on; our present system gives us, if we want them, some 100,000 old soldiers whom we can claim as a right.

No one prefers boy soldiers to stout men. No one for choice would take very young men for sergeants. But if the State will not offer greater inducements, if the nation will not pay the cost, then you must do the best you can with the materials you can purchase in the open labour markets of this country.

401 Lord Wolseley, whose experience of war in all its aspects is second to none, has always expressed himself in terms of the strongest approval of our young soldiers, who have done their duty so well, and without a murmur, and yet are maligned by those who ought to know better.

In his last despatch from the Nile, in June 1885, he thus refers to the lads who had undergone the severe strain of the campaign, and with comparatively so little loss. “It is a source of great pride to me as a soldier, and of satisfaction as a British subject, that upon each fresh occasion when I am brought in contact with Her Majesty’s troops in the field, I find the army more efficient as a military machine than it was the last time I was associated with it on active service. This improvement is evident in all grades and in all arms and departments, but it is, I think, more marked in the rank and file. Military spirit—the essence of military efficiency—is now established in our army in a higher form and on a sounder basis than formerly. I attribute the improvement in moral tone that undoubtedly exists, in no small degree, to the abolition of flogging, and I believe that amongst the officers who have lately had practical experience in the field, even those previously in favour of retaining the lash as a punishment on active service, now fully recognise that many advantages have resulted from its total abolition. The soldier is prouder of himself and of his calling than he used to be, and his self-esteem has also been raised by the healthy feeling of liberty arising from the knowledge that if the army does not suit his tastes, he can easily quit it, instead of being bound to it for ten or twelve years. Our rank and file are morally better, and militarily more efficient, than formerly. The general conduct and bearing of our men in the Sudan left nothing to be desired, and was not only creditable to the British army, but should be also a just source of pride to the British nation.”

Nor in comparison with foreign armies equally on a peace footing is there anything to complain of as regards the length of service of the men serving, for out of battalions of between 500 and 600 men there were in British battalions402 245, in German 59, and in French but 23 men of three years’ service and upwards. Similarly, the Continental recruit ranges in height from 5 feet to 5 feet 1? inches, with a chest measurement of 30.8 inches, but with an age of 20 years; while our “boys” of 18 have a height of 5 feet 4 inches, with a chest of 33 inches.

Even the cry that reservists cannot find employment is an exaggeration, as the report of Lord Wantage’s Committee shows; for it was proved that of 32,700 reservists, 75 per cent. were in regular employ.

Turning to the territorialisation of the regiments, there again must be necessarily conflicting opinions. Those who think regimental prestige is lost with a name, must have a very poor opinion of what prestige really is. Have the navy no esprit de corps? And yet theirs is for their profession, not for H.M.S. Bacchante or the Melpomene. It must not be forgotten, too, that many of the existing regiments have borne other numbers. Has their efficiency been lessened because they had to put 82 instead of 83 on their forage caps in past years? Doubtless it is not worth while changing for changing’s sake; but when administration is simplified, the working of the short service system (which is in a sense forced on us) and recruiting improved, then those who object must show a better case than that of objection merely because they don’t like it.

There is the strongest evidence that the bulk of the men not only don’t care about the dead and gone numbers, but prefer the territorial title. In the presence of some officer, whose enthusiasm clings like ivy round the past glories of the “Onety-oneth,” they may, for obvious reasons, express themselves differently; but, when alone, they do as everybody else does, outside a small and decreasing group of men who live, as arch?ologists do, in a dead past, and use the local name, which to them has a more distinct meaning.

Of course it is to be regretted that the army is not strong enough to do the foreign service it is called upon to perform; that of the two battalions, now tied together as they were formerly linked, one cannot always be at home. But that403 simply comes from the numerical weakness of the army, and has nothing to do with the system. True, the home battalion is practically a secondary dep?t, and why not? So long as the foreign, and often active service, battalion is strong, what does it matter?

So the army in 1881 was territorialised, as it had previously been linked. The linking was less symmetrical than the new plan, for two battalion regiments like the 17th were formerly linked with a single battalion like the 45th. As far as possible, too, battalions that had during their regimental history been formed in the same or neighbouring districts were joined under the same designation. There were of course difficulties, and ludicrous ones at times, as when the 100th Royal Canadians are united with the 3rd Bombay European Regiment to form the Leinster Regiment; but these are of no great moment now, and will be quite forgotten in another fifty years.

But more than grouping battalions of the regular army together is the uniting in one common bond the other parts of our fighting strength. The addition of militia to the regiment, and of the volunteers to the same, both promotes a real and wider esprit de corps, and facilitates recruiting in every way. To hear a Hampshire volunteer say he is leaving his volunteer battalion to “join our fighting battalion,” meaning thereby the 1st regular battalion then on foreign service, expresses very fully the union that, given time and patience, will eventually exist between all branches of our fighting strength.

Hence, therefore, rightly or wrongly, as opinions differ, the army is divided into English regiments with white facings, Scotch (4 Battalions) with yellow facings, and Irish (1 Battalion) with green facings; but the Royal Irish and the Scottish Rifles have dark green, all Royal Regiments blue, the East Kent Regiment buff, the Rifle Brigade black, and the King’s Royal Rifles scarlet facings. Similarly the garrison artillery are partially territorialised, but the cavalry are not so.

The latest change in the administrative branches is the404 conversion of the formerly noncombatant “Commissariat and Transport Department” into the combatant “Army Service Corps,” and the officering of that force by selected officers after a searching course of training and examination.

Much more serious attention is paid, too, to the food of the soldier and military hygiene generally. A quarter of a century ago the ration of bread and meat was eked out by a grocery ration limited both in dimensions and variety. Now, without extra cost to the soldier, and solely by better management and better cooking, he fares not as well as, but better than, many a family in civil life of presumably a better position. Thus the weekly dietary, in a company of a line regiment at Aldershot not long since, comprised for breakfast a selection (every day having a fresh combination) from tea, cocoa, porridge and milk, bloaters, rissoles, bacon, brawn, corned beef, and cold boiled bacon; for dinner, pea soup, roast meat stuffed, potatoes, Irish stew, plain suet pudding, barley soup, meat pies, brown curry and rice, currant rolls, lentil soup, baked meat, haricot beans, sea pies, rice pudding and Yorkshire pudding; and for tea, marmalade, dripping, soused herrings, cheese, kippers, and jam. Not only is the dietary therefore more varied and appetising, but the men trained at the cookery school are fully qualified to cook it properly.

In other respects the army has altered little. The profession is naturally conservative, and does not care to try new armour unless it has proved it. But the story of the army tells this—that in two hundred years it has increased from 3000 men to nearly 667,000 putting aside local colonial troops and our admirable Indian army. This number is composed of
Regular Army     216,688
Army Reserve 80,000     }     110,000
Militia Reserve 30,000
Militia     75,000
Volunteers     255,000
Yeomanry     9,500

405 Of this force, about 110,000 of the regular troops are serving abroad and the remainder at home; while, though no new regiments have been added since 1870, the army has increased in number by 29,000 men, and this without the faintest opposition. All the former dread of it, whether real or affected, has passed away. In place of it has grown up the feeling that it has won the nation’s affection, and has earned and holds its confidence.

Meanwhile, in many a small matter of daily life there is a survival of long-forgotten military ideas. The acts of courtesy of removing one’s hat or shaking hands with an ungloved hand are, after all, but baring the unarmoured head and using the unmailed, and therefore friendly, hand. With the soldier’s salute, the dropping of the sword-point is exposing the unguarded breast, the “present arms” but offering the power of firing the weapon to the person saluted. Passing right hand to right hand is but being on one’s guard, and having the power of easily standing on the defensive. Even the two useless buttons on the back of the man’s coat may be but the survival of the means whereby the sword-belt was kept up.

In the names of bachelor, esquire, and soldier live those of bas chevalier (inferior knight), escuyer, and solde, or pay. In the expression “pulling the long bow” survives the spirit of some of the tales told by stout yeomen over strong ale. In the fantastic flourishes that surround the helmet and shield in the painted coat-of-arms is seen still the mantling that covered the tilting heaulme.

The army is as much part of the social and national life of England as its commercial marine, or its police force. It does the same duty on a large scale for the former as do the latter on a smaller scale in civil life. It protects the commercial enterprise of our merchant princes, finds new outlets for our manufacturers. It guards our seaports at home and abroad; it assists the civil police against the proletariat, and that without creating real hostility.

It represents the fighting spirit that has made the nation what it is and has enlarged its boundaries. It has given us406 what without its aid would have been impossible—external and internal safety.

And, most of all, it has preserved unsullied our national honour. Where the flag flies over British fighting men, there our lads behave as becomes true Englishmen, and face death fearlessly. The spirit that braced the nerves of the men of Lincelles, Albuhera, and Inkerman lives still in their descendants, and those who fought and fell before the Arab rush at Abu Klea may well stand in the nation’s esteem side by side with our heroes of the past.

The End