CURRENT TOPICS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 12429, 19 February 1901, Page 4

CURRENT TOPICS.

“If you had not lived in A choice this century, which century oe . would you have preferred to centuries, live in, and why?” is the unique query which Mr T. P. O’donnor has been firing at a number of public people, with a view to regaling the readers of, “ Mj.A.P.” It is rather reminiscent of the anecdotal enquiry, “If you had a brother, would he like cheese?” But the people of'importance whom Mr O’Connor has approached have responded with commendable alacrity. Mr F. T, Bollep chooses the century treated of in' the first chapter of-Genesis, in order that he pay dodge the retrospect of centuries of horror, and be able to say with appreciative exactitude, “ after me the deluge.” Madame Sarah Grand yearns for the century when “ little children were all happy, when all the ladies had long hair, all the- knights were beautiful (except the bad ones), when nobody knew anything, and everybody believed in ghosts.” This Arcadian age she fails, however, to date. “TobyM. P.” thinks so little of other centuries that he refuses 1 to budge from that date of life into which it has pleased Providence to call him. “ I am content,” he says, “ with what I have seen, suffered, and enjoyed.” , Justin M’Carthy makes a scholastic choice of the fifth century 8.0., so that he might have lived in Athens under the influence of Pericles ; failing that, the eighteenth century, with an accompaniment of Dr Johnson, would ■ satisfy him. Mr Maskeyline appropriately selects the dark ages of the fifteenth century, where his magic might have earned him high renown, failing its bringing him to the rack. Phil May promptly chose “ the next, because then all the fun would be in front of me,” and as rapidly corrected his choice to “ no, the the last, because then all my worries would be at an end, and myself and my troubles beyond the statute of limitations.”' Herman Merivale selects the age of the Johnson coterie, on account of its wealth of epigram and literary, associations. Frankfort Moore leans to the same period, but for a widely different reason. He would like to ask’ Dr Johnson how he ever had the effrontery to pose as a man of letters. Louis Wain would prefer the latter half of the fourteenth century, at the time of the Wars of the Roses. Mr T. W. Russell, M.P., selects the early seventeenth century, because “ all that is best in English character to-day rests upon the stem Puritan basis of that period, , which, with all its drawbacks, stands for good in the history of the world.”

A French cavalry officer a' who cast in, his lot with the frenchman Boers in De ViEebodson the war. Mamul’s Foreign Legion, and who was taken prisoner and sent home to France on parole, has written a record of the war, which is of interest as coming front a Continental annv officer: , He ' regards “ the military profession in England as an. occupation that is little absorbing, but very elegant,” whatever that many mean, an d say® of,our officers that they ‘‘ know next to nothing about warfare, but are brave, very brave.” On the subject* of Tommy Atkins, however, the writer is positively enthusiastic. “ Tommy. Atkins,” he writes, “ the regular, frigid, calm, will advance in a shower of projectiles, his rifle to his shoulder, marking lime, as if on parade. Disdainful of the danger, his head erect, he seems to say, I am English —I pass!” The Boers he pronounces to be slow, physically and morally, profoundly obstinate, astute rather than intelligent, distrustful, and sometimes generous. They lose heart quickly, and just as quickly take hops without reason. They lack pluck and energy, and their ultimate defeat will bo due to absence of discipline and want of proper organisation. The difficulty of the British task he thoroughly appreciates. “ How,” ho asks, “ can you surround-, how can you conquer and crush, adversaries who continually refuse battle, and make off as soon as. a blow is struck at them? Supposing- they are hard pressed, each one goes.

his own way in a different direction, and the commando of 500 ritiyi- which yesterday attacked a small breaks up and scatters before th-o'jcolumn 2000 strong sent ■■ out to capture it. . . . But the dispersion is only momentary, and away in the mountains a, rallying point has‘often been arranged. This sort of warfare is, evi- f dently very hard and fatiguing for ;the in-, | vaders.” Outside the indomitable pluck of Tommy, the writer has an unqualified admiration for the cavalry horses. . The artillery he thinks very ordinary materia;. The cavalry charges, though splendid - dash, he characterises as anything but warfare. He declares the dum-dum bullet- to have been used on both sides, and says that the assertion, that the Boers employed none but those taken -from the British is inadmissible. Many thousands of rounds of explosive bullets were made for the Mauser rifle, the only weapon the Transvaal Bosrs carried into action, and they were put into ■: use before they captured any ammunition.

The question of dntrodnhilitaey cing military drill into the drill nr public schools, which has alSOHOOLS. ready been partially settled in New Zealand, has recently occupied the attention of educational authorities .in Great Britain. The reports of discussions at conference's of head-masters' tod other teachers, show that the utitty of this special form of instruction is by no means unanimously granted at Horn";. It is undeniable that the drill enrols".s will go far towards developing sane bodies, while tfae discipline is bound to implant a spirit of prompt obedience to orders, and increase the pupil’s self-restraint. But there seems to be a strong feeling that all of these o’esirable results can be attined just as well iii the cricket or football field. The connection between Waterloo and the playingfields of Eton is perhaps so trite as to have been forgotten. One of the mast influential educational journals in G'eat Britain declares that military drill in schools, though ostensibly introduced for educational purposes, is virtually a political move, and aims merely at the production of potential soldiers. The children in whom the military spirit is thus encouraged, we are told, are so young that it is impossible for the drill to have any mental effect other than inspiring them with “jingoistic Hooliganism.” The total lack of self-restraint that was evident on Mafeking Day was in too many instances mere mental intoxication, to be followed by the customary icngour.' The moral influence of military drill, accord*, ing to this journal, must be evil, and them is the further difficulty to be faced that all parents do not hold 'the same views on the glory of war. Of course, we need hardly point out that the first object of the drill in our own schools is to guide and assist the physical development of the children. If,' at the same time, it qualifies them in some way for military service, no great harm will he done in a country that is never likely to raise an army for the purposes of aggres-* sion. Even the most submissive member of the Peace Society could scarcely object to bis boys being prepared against the possibility of a foreign foe descending on our shores.' In’ that case he would hardly suggest that the invader should be given possession, while the rightful owners of the country tried to persuade him to submit his claim to arbitration. •