fTo THE EDITOR OF TUE " SPECTATOR."' have just read
in the Times of India of April 21st an article headed "Paucity of Army Officers." The article sets forth the very serious shortage of officers in the Army, the large number of officers whose papers are sent in and are only waiting to go, and the great discontent among Army officers generally. Further, the article seeks to find a reason for this state of affairs, and seems to find one in the fact that officers nowadays do more work, but do not get more pay.
Now, Sir, I do not believe that to be the reason for a quarter of the discontent. Of course we should like more pay, every one would like more pay, but more pay will not cure such discontent as ours. I have been a poor man all my service (fifteen years), but I have never been so poor as I have been discontented and disgusted during the last three years. I meet fellows suffering like myself on every hand. We all have the same story to tell : "Fed up," "Not good enough," "Going as soon as ever I can," &c. ' And then one goes into details, and it is extraordinary how identical they are.
I describe my ease as typical of most. I am discontented, "fed up," and mean to go. I happen to have been just promoted into the battalion that I first joined fifteen years ago. To begin with, there is no more real work done now than there was then. The rank-and-file know no more than they did then, and the officers as a whole are decidedly inferior. But the trouble we are put to, the time that is wasted trying to look as if we were doing some- thing, is simply appalling and degrading. It is merely eyewash for the British public and a source of annoyance to us.
I give an example of waste of time. All officers are lectured about an hour a day by a senior officer, who probably cannot lecture. In many cases the officer is not only unable to lecture, but is worse in the field as a practical soldier than he is indoors with a book in front of him, and this is common knowledge to us all. Hours a week we spend on this egregious nonsense, but it satisfies the British public that the senior officer's time is spent in teaching his juniors and that officers really are doing something. Formerly, instead of this humbug, officers went through special courses under good -instructors at Chatham in fortification and topography and they learnt something ; and there were garrison courses to prepare them for promotion if they wanted assistance. Now it means paying a crammer if you are not certain of yourself.
Fifteen years ago I commanded a company when my Captain was away. The commanding officer did not interfere, he super- vised. We had our fling first, and knew about it afterwards if we did wrong. Since then I have been second-in-command to a Mounted corps on active service, and I made and commanded a battalion on active service. I have now rejoined my regiment, and I do not even command a company. The Colonel and the sergeant-major command my company for me. I am really superfluous. I am a nonentity. I am no use here, but I may not go away. Of course I know all regiments do not suffer in the same way. I quote the above as my own case. It is a very common case, too. I find many others suffer from the same cause. It is a difficult thing to contend with, I know. You cannot promote all the junior officers who have done something; but is it necessary to smother all individuality and responsibility by keeping men at the head of battalions who are not fit to be there? Could not men be found to command battalions who have knowledge and experience to back up their rank? There must be heaps of them waiting, and growing dull and callous as to what happens to them. It is especially necessary after a big war, when many of us have seen something and fancy ourselves a little perhaps. It is easy to work under a man that you respect, but to be humbugged about by an inferior in everything pertaining to military matters except rank is apt to palL Fourteen months ago a second-in-command was promoted in his turn to command. Even to the last-joined subaltern it was patent he was useless.
He has gone abroad to command and teach officers who know more than he does himself.
Another reason for discontent is expensa, useless expense. This has grown enormously since 1900. It has grown in spite of all orders issued by Lord Roberts on the subject. Their only result was to eyewash the public. Our expenses are greater than ever. Au officer is hardly ever in the same quarters four months on end. There is an unnecessary amount of discomfort and expense entailed by moving about which causes discontent, for one's travelling allowance never covers one's expenses.
Now for a word on the crowning expense of the whole lot. Never before had officers ever been put to such expense and inconvenience in the way of dress as they have been since 1900, and none of it has done any good. It has merely emptied our pockets for nothing. I enumerate some of the changes. The blue serge, an excellent garment, has been done away with ; frock-coat has been brought in which we hardly ever wear ; the great-coat has been changed, not improved ; the badges of rank on our service jackets have been altered three times ; the cap that would stick on our heads is done away with, a cap (hideous) that falls off has been introduced; gold lace has been taken off the collars and cuffs of our tunics, gold lace has been added to the tails of our tunics ; our sashes have been taken off our shoulders and put round our waists ; the pattern of the sash has been altered ; we wear gold sword-belts instead of buff. Where is the use in all this expense? Is it good enough ? Ask an Army officer.
Previous page
