The evidence taken as to the qualities of the men
of the Regular Army goes to show that although in moral they left little to he desired, the physique of the later drafts was poor, while as a whole they were lacking in intelligence and indi- vidual resourcefulness, and inferior to the Boers in shooting, using cover, and entrenching. As regards the officers, there .was a general consensus of opinion that the junior officers did better than the seniors, because they were less fettered by the vicious traditions of an obsolete system. Lord Kitchener, in particular, complained of a lack of professionalism in the higher ranks, and stated that he had some difficulty in obtain- ing a sufficient number of competent officers to command columns in the later stages of the war. The improvised character of the Staff arrangements also caused great con- fusion, and in general the supply of trained officers was most inadequate. The best junior officers in the Militia and Volun- teers were used to replenish the Regular Army, and the Militia were largely officered by untrained youths. The Com- mission, however, speaks well of the Volunteers, and in par- ticular of the C.I.V. The first contingent of the Imperial Yeomanry were the best, but even the second contingent did good work when they had received some education in the field, and, "looked at as raw material, were of a better average quality than that obtained at the ordinary rate of pay in the Army." In regard to the Colonial contingents, whose fine qualities are freely acknowledged, it is interesting to learn that Sir Redvers Buller was the author of the notorious tele- gram discouraging the sending of mounted troops.
Previous page
