[TO TEIE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]
Sin,—Your very suggestive remarks upon Mr. Heinle- Grohman's article in the Nineteenth Century on the decline of rifle-shooting in this country naturally fall into a rather lugubrious vein. There is one point, however, on which I should like to reassure your readers. With regard to the international competition held in Holland this summer, those who are conversant with the requirements of military shooting look on its result as giving the very smallest indication of the marksmanship, for fighting purposes, of the competing nations. The hair triggers and other refinements used in the competition reduced it to the level of a match with weapons specialised for match shooting, and under conditions largely unpraetical. Could troops, for instance, go into a campaign with set triggers requiring only an imperceptible touch of the finger to discharge them, or rifles expressly made with very heavy barrels to steady them against the minor tremors of the muscles ? In reference to the suggestion that rifle-shoot- ing might become a popular sport if short ranges could be generally established in our towns and villages, there can be no doubt that this, if practicable, would be a long step
in the right direction, as affording a foundation for military efficiency as well as an interesting recreation. Still,
as you say, the greater, part of proficiency in rifle-shooting can be acquired at short distances, modern military efficiency demands much more than this. We shall probably never again see a battle decided by rifle-fire at ranges so long as those involved at Omdurman, but it seems likely that only on very rare occasions will opposed troops arrive within three hundred yards of each other without one side or other giving way. Certainly only a small proportion of the shooting would take place so near as this, and troops unaccustomed to fire at longer ranges could not be expected to take the field with confidence against a regular army in this country. And as we have not here the defiles of a mountain country, so favourable to the local sharpshooter pitted against drilled strangers, to defend, so we have nut, what almost every Swiss and Tyrolese village has, steep ground near at hand, forming a natural stop-butt capable of absorbing all stray bullets. We live, too, in a free country—so free that Hyde Park is not available for a Volunteer review—and both Regular and Auxiliary forces have their efficiency jeopardised —one should perhaps rather say crippled—by an undue regard being paid, when rifle-ranges are in question, to the nerves of the public. (Does not this term, "the public," too often exclude those who give their time and their sinews, with or without reward, to the service of the Commonwealth, but include conspicuously the useless busybody and the noisy loafer ?) Ranges, however short, can never be cheap to pro- Tide in towns,—hardly even can they in any way, even by screens, be made absolutely safe in a flat, populated district, if we may judge by the history of that at Wormwood Scrubbs. But if rifle-shooting, which will always be devoid of the spectacular interest enjoyed by cricket and football, is to become an amusement of the population in general, there must be rifle-ranges not only close to our villages, but well within the borders of our great towns. Yet, could these difficulties in any degree be overcome, there are many, I feel sure, besides myself who would welcome the realisation of such a prospect, and gladly lend a hand to help in forming a L ague of civilian riflemen, affiliated, of course, in some way to the National Rifle Association, the qualification for full na-mbership being a certain standard of skill. Is this an im-
possible dream am, Sir, Sze., TWENTY-ONE YEARS A VOLUNTEER,
Previous page
