[TO THM EDITOR Or THM “spacrarea.] Si,—With reference to your
article on "A Problem in Military Education" in the Spectator of February 8th, I should like to point out that the excellent suggestions therein contained are rendered valueless if only for the reason that no material encouragement is put forward. Lord Esher states that there should be annual tests in certain specific subjects which be considers necessary for the maintenance of an up-to-data interest in the soldier's profession. Again, these are excellent so far as they go ; but the question arises, do they sufficiently represent the real issues at stake ? I think not. The case as far as I can see—perhaps my vision is limited—lies in a nut- shell. If you want the officer to go outside his sphere of the ordinary routine of his work, you must pay him. You must offer him special financial inducements in order that he may accept the higher branches of his profession seriously. In the sister Service there is no lack of encouragement on this score. Every branch which is immediately beyond the naval officer's regular work offers financial inducements which are sufficient to promote the keenest industry. What chance has the Army officer of studying the great and scientific art of military history under the existing conditions ? Why, he cannot even afford to pay for his books, much less to engage Professors to explain them ; and if the ordinary Subaltern attempted it, he would be declared a bankrupt in a very short time.—I am, [Our correspondent does not seem to have quite understood our proposal. It was that officers before obtaining the steps of Lieutenant and Captain should be required—as in the Navy—to go to a Military College for a five or six months' course.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
