LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER ON ARMY REFORM. vra TER EDITOR OF TRY "SPECTATOR."] Sr,-I have always regarded the Spectator as a paper which desires to be fair, but the statement regarding myself which
appears in your issue of July 21st seems to me so unfair that I am sure you will allow me to correct it. Commenting on the debate on Army matters which took place in the House of Commons on July 19th, you say :—
" Mr. Haldane pointed out that Mr. Arnold-Forster had definitely proposed to abolish fourteen battalions of the infantry of the Line, yet now took exception to the proposal to abolish eight, and hinted that Mr. Arnold-Forster had also contemplated reducing two battalions of the Guards. That, no doubt, was a good House of Commons hit."
And you proceed to speak of my "wild schemes" of reform. I venture to suggest that Mr. Haldane's remark was not a House of Commons hit; it was something very close to a
serious misrepresentation, as indeed I was able to show in the course of the very same debate, when I read to the House my own words with respect to the proposal to reduce fourteen battalions of the Line. The words I read were as follows :— "We shall have to create in these counties these territorial battalions, and until we have created them we shall not be able to effect the reduction in the existing Line battalions which I hope we may ultimately be able to effect." Read with this comment, I think it will be seen that Mr. Haldane's remark loses all its point.
With regard to the question of the Guards, it would perhaps have' been better to have made a positive statement than to have indulged in "a hint." It is perfectly true that the question of reducing two battalions of the Guards was brought before me when I was at the War Office. The Guards at that time were far below establishment, and were very short of officers. It was suggested by some friends of the Brigade that it might be wise to reduce two battalions in order to restore the other eight to a condition of efficiency. It appeared to me, however, that there was another alternative,—namely, to raise the Brigade to its proper establishment, and to fill up the deficiency of officers. This is the course that was actually adopted. The Brigade is now over establishment, has its full complement of officers, and several candidates for commissions on the waiting list. It has never been more efficient than at present. Perhaps if this statement had accompanied the Secretary of State's " hint " the value of the reference to my supposed intentions would have been appreciated. I am still of opinion that the course adopted was greatly to be preferred to that which has actually found favour, and which consists in destroying two of the battalions which have just been raised to such a pitch of efficiency. In this connexion I ask leave to say a word with regard to your own reference to my "wild schemes." I think they cannot all have been "wild." A great many of them have been carried into effect, and as a consequence the Army, as the Secretary of State has truly said, is "in a condition in which it has never been before, both in point of quality and quantity."
I am glad to note that you, Sir, approve of another of the "wild schemes," for I read in the Spectator of July 7th that, in your opinion, there "is a place in our system for a small body of really short-service troops with a proportionately large Reserve," and that this force should be raised upon a three years', or preferably a two years', term of colour service. As I have been preaching this doctrine for many years, and have been roundly abused for so doing, I am glad to find that I have now such a powerful ally as the Spectator.
Again, I remember that two years ago no words were too bad to describe the wickedness of the "wild proposal" that the Volunteers should be divided into two classes, and yet I notice that, speaking at Newlands Corner a few days ago, the Secretary of State for War is reported to have spoken as follows :—
" When they came to the Volunteers he thought that they had made a great mistake up to this day, which he thought it ought to be their business to rectify. They had always talked as if all Volunteers should do the same thing and be of the same
quality It seemed to him that they would always have a certain part of the Volunteers very highly trained, (1.pp:oar:thing to the level of the Line, which came next in front of them ; and then the Volunteers must 'shade' back into those who perhaps could not give a great deal of time for great training."
These words are so nearly identical with those which I ventured to use three years ago that I confess I take com- fort, and begin to think that after all I was not so very much mistaken.
Another "wild scheme" affected the Yeomanry. I do not remember whether the Spectator condemned that scheme, but I know a great many other people did, and in the strongest
possible terms. I am happy to think that every Yeomanry officer now knows that the adoption of that scheme has done more than anything to make the Yeomanry the admirably efficient force it is. It has been a great satisfaction to me to receive the most generous testimony to this fact from some of those who were foremost in attacking the proposal when I first made it. I could furnish many other examples all tending in the same direction, and serving to convince me that now that they can be examined apart from prejudice, and outside the arena of party strife, nearly all the "wild schemes" still outstanding are being recognised by competent judges as reasonable solutions of difficult problems. I never have doubted, and do not now doubt, that most, if not all, of these " schemes " will ultimately be adopted. At present I know that the linked-battalion system for supplying drafts has won the day, a Pyrrhic triumph as far as the Army is concerned, and one which, in the long run, will inflict upon it even a greater blow than that which it has already suffered. But that common-sense will eventually prevail I feel confident, and common-sense will be greatly reinforced by the desire for economy, which is incompatible with the maintenance of the linked-battalion system.—I am, Sir, &c., H. 0. ARNOLD-FORSTER.
2 The Abbey Garden, Westminster, S. W.
[The Spectator has for the last five or six years urged the importance of developing the miniature short-service Army provided by the Guards. As to the Volunteers, we objected to Mr. Arnold-Forster's scheme because be wished to drive out of the Force as redundant and useless the men who could not conform to his rigid requirements as regards service in camp.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
