CORRESPONDENCE.
THE BRITISH AND THE FOREIGN SOLDIER.
[TO THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Since the South African campaign has taken a more satisfactory turn, and the public, which always judges by results, is beginning to recover from its anxiety and the inseparable querulousness, it is perhaps now the right moment to reconsider the case of a much maligned body. Though the English are not generally given to the French habit of breaking their idols, it cannot be denied that the public was looking out for a scapegoat somewhere, and that the valiant body of British officers had to come in for a good share of the blame. Some of the critics who seemed to be diffident of their own judgment were at pains to collect any expression of blame that had been uttered by military writers in France, Austria, and especially Germany, who are considered as entitled to the last word on every military question or incident. It is hardly worth while to take seriously the grave utterances of those Austrian heroes whose alleged authority is derived from their respective experiences at Magenta, Solferino or Konig- griitz, or of their French comrades with their record of Tonquin, and mismanaged Madagascar. I will admit that the prompt and successful management of three successive wars entitles the voice of Germany, and especially of Prussian officers, to be heard on questions of their competence. I will not, however, inquire as to whether those captions critics really belong to the veterans of that generation of giants, or whether they are of a younger generation that has gone through those wars only over maps and charts in their studies. I must point out, however, that whatever their right to an authoritative opinion on points of strategy and tactics may be or may not be, it is certain that not one of them can claim any experience of Colonial war- fare, not only in tropical climes, but even in a moun- tainous country. Austria may, perhaps, lay claim to some sort of achievement in the suppression of the rising among the Basnians and Herzegovinians, who, like the Boers, were assisted by the uneven surface of the country they inhabit. This case in point is precisely calculated to illustrate the enormous difficulties of dealing with-races that combine primitive and hardy habits of life with some of the resources of European civilisation. But the Bosnians never possessed any period of recognised or virtual independence during which they might have been able to create, like the Boers, a military organisation of their own, and to provide it with up- to-date improvements and inventions. As far as they had any weapons at all they were of a most primitive kind, which might have stood them in good stead in mediivral warfare, but which had not the least chance against a regular Army far. nished with modern artillery. Nor was the field of operations at a distance of thousands of miles from the military stations or even from the native places of the Austrian soldiers. Not only was there no embarking and disembarking of troops for weary and enfeebling sea-voyages, but both soldiers and provisions, as well as arms, were conveyed by rail to the theatre of war, which stood at the very threshold of the State which had always to be prepared for an outbreak of trouble on its south- eastern frontier. In spite of all these advantages Austria found it to be a hard task to pacify those unskilled warriors who were able to hold out for many months, and who were only ultimately subdued by a regular army of about two hundred thousand men. If both home and foreign critics would only take the pain of considering such instances and compare them with the far greater diffi. culties and drawbacks the British Army has to contend with in its gigantic task, they would not lose their patience together with their common sense on the strength of initial reverses which were almost inevitable. They would then judge with more fairness that much-abused Army. They would then not refuse their admiration for those gallant officers who are fulfilling their noble task under most trying circumstances, not ta mention the brave soldiers of the rank-and-file to whose intrepidity, undaunted courage, and unshaken discipline we cannot pay a sufficiently high tribute of praise. If foreign critics have been stingy in their praises of the British soldier on the present occasion, the reason is not far to seek. Malevolence, ignorance, but especially disappoint- ment, are the chief motives which inspire the foreign critics' pens with the diatribes he hurls at Tommy Atkins and his leaders. To achieve results like those achieved by Great Britain, to enlarge the Empire to such an extent within the brief space of one generation, to have performed military operations of such magnitude, all this could only have been possible with the aid of an Army that must be reckoned as quite excep. tional, aye, incomparable, as regards grit, perseverance, courage, and staying power. It would be something of an anomaly to place the Continental soldier on the same pedestal with the British. From his early boyhood the future Tommy lives in the midst of all sorts of sport, such as cricket, foot- ball, wrestling, boxing, rowing, &c. Though they do not like to admit it—ils sent trop matins pour ca /—the foreigners have only within the last decade or two become alive to the advantages of physical training for their young generation by means of sports as practised in England. The food served out to the British soldier is of a more substantial and health-giving nature than the olla podridas, bouillies, Rind- fleisch pat Klasse, and other decoctions in which the Continental sons of Mars revel. Without alluding to other instances in support of my statement, I am fain to pronounce Tommy Atkins as constituting a physically superior fighting material than any of his foreign comrades. As to his moral qualities the advantages of the British soldier are yet more striking. He is not a mere automaton in the field of action. He has spirit and initiative of his own,—the natural heritage of a free-born citizen ; he does not whine and-fret, but expresses discontent whenever there is a lull in fighting. Above all—and this redounds to the highest credit of the British warrior—he is a volunteer, and does not, as his Con- tinental comrade, serve under compulsion. Hence it is only right to assume that the British soldier's patriotism must be of a loftier and more unselfish sort than the patriotism which has to be instilled by compulsion, and thus becomes more os
less artificial. The English soldier's patriotism is none the less deep and true because he does not constantly shout gloire, patrie, liberte. For Tommy is a man of deeds, not words.
Whatever be your military reputation, all ye messieurs les trangers, however splendid be your military glory, past and present, you have yet to make your debut in a war under such conditions and with such surroundings as those that habitually face the British soldier on active service. European wars, where your soldiers could afford to despise water as a refreshment, owing to plentiful supply of wine, beer, and spirits in the way of loot,—such wars in comparison with those the British forces were and are engaged in are mere excursions.—I am, Sir, SZ,O., AN IMPARTIAL FOREIGNER.
Previous page
