BRITISH CAVALRY.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XXXXI, Issue 7053, 24 October 1900, Page 2

BRITISH CAVALRY.

The importance of the cavalry branch of an army can hardly be over-estimated. Abundant proof of that was given during the Franco-German war, wherein the Prussian Uhlans did such excellent service. They were here, there, and everywhere, harassing the French in their every movement, and doing much to add lustre to the German arms. Recently, in South Africa we have bad striking exemplification of the need for efficient cavalry. At the outset of the campaign, we were at a total disadvantage, the mobility of - the enemy being remarkable, while we were numerically weak in cavalry. However, as soon as oureyeß were opened, we hastened to remedy this defect, and the splendid work done by French's cavalry is now historical. While there are some cavillers who will fail to see the smallest good in any department of the British army, those capable of judging and whose duty it has been to closely watch, are loud in their praise of the grand things done by the horse soldier during the South African war. For instance, the Commander-in- Chief has spoken in terms of the highest praise, and other authorities have done likewise. Still, these officers are not blind to the fact that there is still room for much improvement. Writing to The Times, a Capetown correspondent says: "lam quite prepared to admit that our cavalry is very far from being perfect, and I consider that any man of ordinary intelligence who has taken part in the Kimberley relief march, the operations at Faardeburg, and the subsequent march to Bloemfontein, could suggest many important, I might say necessary, changes. I contend that as our material in men and horses is by far the best in the world, so our cavalry is facile princeps—bxxt do we make the best use of the splendid material at our command ? No, certainly we do not ; and I maintain that our cavalry ought to be, could be. must be, doubled in efficiency." The darkest spot picked by the correspondent is " the ridiculous weight that our horses have to carry." It is, he says, aa impossible weight. Think of it, that a light-weight horse should have at least 18st put on his back, and after being piled up with this impossible weight, must (if our cavalry is to be efficient), satisfy the following requirements : " He must be able to march for many days consecutively at least 20 miles a day— 3o would be nearer the mark ; he may then be called upon at any time, possibly at the end of a long day, to gallop two miles and charge, and then with his 18st on his back take part in a pursuit in which the problem to be solved is how to catch a fleeing enemy on comparatively fresh horses riding 4st or Sst lighter. Is not this the reductio ad absurdtivi, and yet this is what our cavalry must do to give their full value ? The difficulty lies in reducing the weight to rational dimensions. What is to be done, then ? I have mentioned a rational weight, and you will ask me what I call rational— from 13st 71b to 14st. Then you will say, how is it possible to solve this problem, seeing that if one could reduce the actual weight of arms and equipment by 2st (Which would be the most one could hope for) it would still leave our horses burdened with 2st over the ' rational ' weight. Manifestly the solution is that this 2st must be carried elsewhere than on the horse. The writer proceeds to suggest that light carts, one per field troop— that is, four per squadron — might be added to the establishment for these purposes. The conditions that should be satisfied in carrying the kits otherwise than on the hprses are that they must be able to be got at any moment they are required, they should be kept dry, and every nian in the troop should know where his kit is, and be able to get it without disturbing the rest. With a cart none of these requirements would be very difficult to deal with. The saddle now weighs the absurd burden of 28 lb ; the American cavalry saddle weighs considerably less than 14 lb. The head-gear could" be reduced, say, 25 per cent. The lance, sword, and carbine could also be materially reduced in weight. The writer even goes further, and suggests doing away with cloak and cape on active service and the carrying of everything not absolutely needed at the time in carts. There soeins to be some merit in the suggestions, and we may hope that when Lord Roberts assumes supreme CQinniand of the army the cavalry branch will receive the attention its importance entitles it to.