CARBINE V. RIFLE FOR MOUNTED RIFLES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11162, 7 September 1899, Page 6

CARBINE V. RIFLE FOR MOUNTED RIFLES.

TO THE EDITOB. Sir,— In a previous issue we were informed that it had been decided to call in the re-cently-issued rifles and substitute the latest pattern carbine, with knife bayonet. On inquiry, I was informed that the carbine was quite as effective as the rifle, in fact a shade more so, and being much lighter was handled more easilyhence the change. For the sake of argument, I will allow the carbine to be as effective as the same pattern rifle at present in the hands of our mounted rifles (though I quite fail to see how this can be), but one important matter seems to have been completely ignored, that in addition to a shorter firearm there will be a still further reduction in length of bayonet, thus placing the users at a distinct disadvantage if ever on active service, a possibility which has always to be considered, especially with colonial volunteers, for should Great Britain become involved with a combination of Powers, she would have enough to do with her small army in defending her own shores, and we should have to rely upon our own troops for the defence of our colony. Mounted rifles, or mounted infantry, as they are termed in the Imperial service, are infantry" pure and simple, and are armed as such, and if our mounted rifles (under the proposed alterations) had to meet infantry armed as the latter would be with a long rifle, it is quite evident that in bayonet work our men would be fatally handicapped so far as length of reach is concerned. Mounted infantry often have to seize and hold advanced positions in attack, and vice versa in retreat, often necessitating bayonet work. Again, the branch of service against which they would have most frequently to act cavalry— bo armed as themselves so far as firearms are concerned, and furthermore, carry swords against the bayonet of the mounted rifles, and if it were a case of forming square to repel cavalry, the short carbine and bayonet would, I am afraid, be found a poor weapon. One and all would welcome the change of bavonet, substituting the modern and effective '■ knife bayonet' l for tie more than antiquated "triangular toasting fork at present in use: but why for the sake of a few extra pounds in weight should a shorter firearm be considered necessary ? The present rifles are very easily handled, and so far as one can see. nothing but disadvantage can accrue from the proposed change, even should the carbine prove to be as effective a firearm as the rifle, a fact as before mentioned 1 am more than sceptical upon. Almost- without exception all the mounted rifles I have conversed with upon the matter are averse to the change, stating they find their present rifle no trouble at all when mounted.— am, etc., THOMAS Am**