Topics of the Week.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXV, Issue XIV, 6 October 1900, Page 626

Topics of the Week.

Undignified Presentations. The ill-considered, ill-advised, and ill-timed attempt to raise a shilling subscription for the purpose of making a present to that great and hardworking general. Sir Redvers Buller, has, I am heartily glad to see, fallen perfectly fiat. Of all generals concerned in the war, not excepting the great “Bobs” himself, none has done harder work, none deserves a higher meed of gratitude, than Buller. His work has not been showy. Often It looked as if he had failed; but we now know that be was the man who had the gravest difficulties to face, and that he was the man who, unmoved by public outcry of hasty criticism, worked doggedly on, and who is both directly and indirectly largely responsible for ’ the successful issue of the Transvaal struggle. But i<is not fitting that the rewards for great service such as Buller has rendered should be tendered by small and insignificant communities. and it is not compatible with the dignity of the Army or of its chief officers and dignitaries, that they should accept more or less useless, though possibly expensive, trash at the hands of sections of the population in various portions of the Empire. In the case of Baden-Powell there was some sort of excuse. The affair was done on impulse and on the instant, while enthusiasm and admiration had been roused to white heat by a dramatic figure in a sensational incident. But, even then, there were those who protested, lest the thing should be made a precedent. And evidently a certain set of persons so considered it. But the public is either weary of subscriptions, or, as I believe, realises that the proceeding is undignified and unEnglish. It shows a certain tendency to hysteria to be strongly depreciated. Britain is well able to reward her generals. Should a generous pouring out of the national gratitude necessitate a call on the national purse, be sure the colonies will be glad, aye. and proud to take their share of it. They will, indeed, demand to be allowed to do so. But the giving of paltry presents by public subscription must cease. Donations of walking sticks mounted in gold, cases of pipes, small lumps of bullion, model poodles and model lions, etc., etc., bring ridicule alike on donor and recipient, and drag the Army and ourselves into contempt with other nations, whom we have always regarded as less self-controlled than ourselves. It is not as if the past offered evidence of any national neglect in this way. The very titles borne by two of the greatest notables in Africa show how delighted Britain is to honour those who serve her successfully. Lord Roberts, of Kandahar, and Lord Kitchener, of Khartoum. these are titles which bear their origin on their face, nor were they by any means empty. Lord Wolseley,Com-mander-in-Chief of the British Army, was allotted £25,000 for his success in the first Ashanti war; while Tel-el-Keber and the campaign which it ended, brought a peerage, with £ 20,000 to help keep up the dignity thereof. The Peninsular War gave Wellington his dukedom, so that subsequent successes and Waterloo left the nation nothing else to bestow. except an awe and reverence amounting almost to the worship accorded a god. Again, Nelson was a signal instance of the lavish generosity of a grateful nation. A peer's coronet and £2OOO a year was England's gift for Aboukir Bay. £IOOO a year was voted by the Irish Parliament, and the East India Company presented him with £IO,OOO. Nelson, indeed, does furnish one ,instance of great noblemen and foreign potentates giving individual presents, which some may claim to be to the Baden-Powell-Buller presentation idea. He certainly received presents to the value of over £ JOO,OOO, but the circumstances were so extraordinary that we cannot consider those presents on all fours with our pipes, etc., etc. To go still further back, Marlborough—besides unscrupulous pickings—made no less than £500,000 sterling by his campaigns', while such men of a later date, as Colin Campbell and Lord Gough were recipients of handsome marks of a nation*s gratitude. The tendency has. moreover, not been to economy in this line, for it must not

be forgotten Kitchener received £30,000 with his title. A Loudon paper suggests that £IOO,OOO will be voted R borts, and I hope it may be. If so, Buller will receive no insignificant douceur. If, as is possible, Roberts is made a Duke, and given the Garter, Sir Redvers Buller will assuredly not be left ont in the cold. A peerage will possibly be his, and though everyone knows money to him would be a mere superfluity, yet that will not be forgotten either. Therefore, I do most strongly counsel all and sundry to steer clear of those subscription lists. They are, to use the slang of the day, “out of date.” The Lost Emperor. What has become of the Emperor of China? Is he still iu the laud of the living, or has he. to borrow the Chinese euphemistic phrase. "Become a guest on high?” The Allies are in Pekin with the ultimate object of restoring him to his throne as the most certain method of securing peace and justice to the country, but Kwang Hsu is nowhere to be seen. If he is alive, he keeps himself, or is kept by his wicked aunt, the Empress Dowager, severely iu the background. The latter supposition is much the more likely of the two. What a magnificent plot for a novel would the domestic troubles of the Imperial Chinese family furnish. But merely because the actors in it are Mongolians, the story appeals but indifferently to the Caucasian mind. Not so among the Chinese, however. The Emperor’s unhappy plight excites no cud of warm sympathy throughout that vast Empire. Millions bemoan the lot of their rightful prince, and I can fancy these loyalists drinking to the health of their dethroned monarch in fragrant Bohea, as tne Jacobites used to drink to Charlie over the water. Appeals have been addressed to the Powers from the loyalists of China, praying for the restoration of their sovereign, and throughout the country emissaries of the Reform Party axe busy stirring up the people by the recital of his misfortunes. Beyond the boundaries of the Flowery Land, too, the cause of the outcast ruler is being pleaded, and, unknown to us. in the laundries and market gardens of America and Australasia the sad story of Kwang Hsu perchance draws tears from almond eyes. I read in a San Francisco paper to hand by the last mail an account of a meeting- in that city, where the assembly was addressed by a young- Chinese student of fortune. who is making a. tour of the world in the interests of his Emperor. In impassioned speech this orator, Leung Kai by name, called upon his countrymen to save their country, and reasoned with such effect that some £6OO was collected in the hall towards the Chinese Empire Restoration Association fund. Parts of Leung Kai’s address are worth quoting. He began: “O! brothers, thousands of miles I have travelled to deliver the last message of our beloved Emperor, who, for the first time in our 4000 years of history, happens to be the only ruler who has appealed to his people for assistance. I come as one of his direct agents to ask that you give heed to his cry for help. This noble man who appeals to you is the first honest Emperor with which the Creator has blessed China for thousands of years. Can you, as sons of our ancient empire, refuse him suceosr?” And again: “O. men of China, do you know that the father of us all is at this moment a prisoner? Do you realise that this great and good man is suffering for us: that our parent is being- persecuted by his heartless, wicked aunt, the Empress Dowager? Fathers, sons and In-others, can you remain deaf to his entreaties? Father, forgive my weak heart if my eloquence be insufficient to convince all your children of your peril. Do not weep, my brothers, liberty and reform will soon be ours, when we will reverently lay aside tbe relies of barbarism aud begin life •new. All will soon be changed, and the regeneration of China will follow.” We who are not brothers might almost spare a tear to snch an entreaty. At all events, it adds greatly to our interest in the inner aspects of thia Chinese business to understand that the epparcntlv imnassive Chinese, whom we are disposed to regard as de-

void of loyal feeling and utterly materialistic, have some objects of devotion and feelings in common with ourselves. Some Great Men’s Opinions on the War Lessons. When Pretoria fell, the “up-to-date"’ journalist—l use the slang of his cult —made the announcement that "the war was over.” After events have proved that this statement was. as he would put it, "a wee bit previous,” but last week’s news brings us very near the end. War, as war, is apparently over; the task remaining is the subjection of a certain number of rebels. Let us hope it will be firm, severe, and therefore speedy and merciful. Corfversation now. therefore, w-hen it concerns South Africa at all, is of the lessons of the war. The opinion of tbe man in the street, we have heard ad nauseam, but as a sort of foretaste of the hurricane of criticism which will burst over the War Office when all is over, that very enterprising editor, Mr Harmsworth, has been collecting the views of a number of more or less eminent authorities. A .sort of examination paper was set, and the answers of several notabilities appearrtl in the last issue of the paper jiosted by the ’Frisco mail, ’xhe first query was: “Has the British Army justified its traditions in the Boer war?” Lieut.General Sir Andrew Clarke says "Yes,” and so do pretty well all others, saving Sir Chas. Dilke, who responds: "From the reports of the correspondents which failed to pass the censor, aud from the report of eye witnesses, we are beginning to find that the war has not been carried on in a satisfactory fashion. The troops have fought well on the whole, but not by any means on all occasions.” Coming from so able and judicial a critic, this is not pleasant reading, and rather dashes one, after the enthusiastic chorus of rather indiscriminate praise from other and less known personages. Mr W. H. Wilson, the well-known military expert, is also pessemistic in his view. He asserts "the army has not justified its traditions of the Wellington period, and in no war since the American war of 1775-1783 has it sustained so many reverses and defeats. In the eyes of the world it has distinctly lost credit.” Another question of much interest to us out here, was, “Have the colonial troops taught us anything, and vice versa?” Sir Edwin Clarke answers: “Yes; that you must select your rank and file in the Imperial Army from the same trained and educated classes that the colonial troops are taken from; but to do this, you must pay a ‘living wage' and deal with them as reasonable, responsible beings.” Many others reply to the same effect, in different words and manner. Sir Howard Vincent adds as well, that “colonials are more up-to-date than the English troops.” But the fullest answer as to what our boys have taught the” authorities comes from Julian Ralph, who, if somewhat prejudiced. is still likely to be heard with attention. He declares colonials have taught England “many things and much They have shown the value of the thinking private, who can fight on his own. and does not need the constant supervision of his officers. They have taught us that the most comfortable dress of the soldier is the best dress. They have shown us that colonial men of ambition and brains will join the Army if the chances of preferment are not. limited to those who boast high birth and wealth. They lead us to infer that such men, willing to adopt military life as a profession, must also be plentiful at home, and can be got with proper pay to displace the men who are in the Army for social and sporting advantages, but who are not, and do not want to be, soldiers in a serious sense, or as a life calling.” Sir Chas. Dilke is not to be driven to enthusiasm or to gush. He savs of the colonials that in many ways they were less experienced than any part of our own troops, but that owing to the higher rate of pay a better stamp of private was procurable! This is somewhat negative and lukewarm, and one would like to ask Sir Charles on what occasion in the war colonial troops showed obvious inexperience. On the subject of the alleged break down of the army medical corps and bad hospital management there seems to be a general opinion amongst the experts—especially those who were there—that all things considered the results achieved were creditable. Sir G. Howard Clarke Vineent after pointout that war- hospitals canna* possibly equal those of England, eth*

etc.. in time of peace, «ay»: “Grumblers should stay at home, or take their mothers with them. War cannot be as nice as mother makes it.'* There is sound commonsense in this, and it must be remembered that the glory earned by our soldiers is not only for facing death, but for having to inevitably face hardship and sickness in a far country. The one subject on which ail are unanimous, on which all shout aye with a mighty and indignant roar, is the plain question of the necessity for reform at the War Office. “Drastic reform” is needed, say they all. Evidently there are rods in pickle for several persons in high places. Let us hope they' will effect such a tingling on the indurated posteriors of these gentlemen that like the small boys we see in the street they will ejaculate “Shan’t play.” Fashion's Fiat. A youth recently entered a fashionable restaurant in Chicago attired in what is known in the States as a shirt waist, a garment which though long in vogue among the ladies there, and here too, has only lately been adopted by men in America as a cool substitute for coat and waistcoat. It was not customary', however, in that restaurant for its patrons to appear at dinner save in dress suits, not even although the theromometer was at 90 degrees, ami the proprietor resenting the innovation requested the visitor to leave. So the latter went forth dinnerless because for the sake of his personal comfort he had dared to violate the code of a foolish fashion. The Americans appear to be worse than most people in their readiness to uphold and conform to ridiculous conventions of this kind. Last month, according to a journal before me, when the terrible heat of mid-August rendered life scarcely durable to those in close offices, some of the employees in one of the Government Departments at Washington discarded their coats, cuffs and collars and breathed freely for a time. But only for a brief time. As soon as the head of the department heard what had been done the order went forth that in future no such divestment of their raiment would be permitted the clerks. Happily for us here in New Zealand we are not such thralls to fashion as dwellers in American cities appear to be. When the hot weather comes round ag'ain oui' clerks may be found in their shirt sleeves, just the same as the grocer or the butcher. Even the bank officials, who regard themselves as a sort of hierarchy of male fashion, sacrifice appearances to comfort, being - careful only to retain the high collar, that badge of respectability. It is worth remarking how the collar holds its own. Though in most of its present day forms it certainly entails more discomfort to its wearer in warm weather than any other part of his attire. The average collar wearing man will almost discard any other part of his dress before that inconvenient band of stiff starched linen. The hat may be worn shabby, the coat threadbare, the shoes down at heel and out at toe, but their wearer may still retain his self-respect and look the world in the face if his neck is enclosed by a collar of some sort. There are circles where the top hat is, as it were, the indispensable crown of male attire. It has never achieved that dignity here. The doctor, lawyer, or banker, who in the Old Country could scarcely issue abroad with any other head gear and preserve his good name, can here sally forth in soft wide-awake billycock, or even soft cloth cap, without attracting any attention. But neither they nor lesser individuals could violate the law relating - to collar wearing. Consider it, would you trust your body, or your estate, or your banking account to individuals who appeared in public collarless? Is there then so much to wonder at in the dress conventions which prevail in other places where, for instance, to sit down to dinner in any other garb than a dress suit may excite dismay? The sphere of the swallow-tailedcoatis more limited here, but with'in its limits there is a Draconian code that makes the wearing of it compulsory. And who ever dared to defy that law so far as to appear at a ball in a tweed suit? ♦ o o o o The Arraignment of Hockey. A correspondent, a lady, from the writing, I judge, but more conclusively from the sentiment of her letter—for a masculine hand is a common feminine characteristic in these days—asks me if I have witnessed a Indies’ hockey match as it is played here, and if I

have was I not shocked at the display of roughness. She dreads the introduction of the game, prophesying that it will become among ladies what footbaH is among the youths of the other sex, “an occasion too often for mere rough and tumble horse play and incipient savagery.” She foresees the time when our maidens, with crimsoned faces and dishevelled locks, will struggle and scramble over the fate of a hockey ball precisely as our boys fight over a football. She conjures up a terrible picture of a muddy arena where the shrieksandcries of the feminine contestants are drowned by the yells of their respective barraekers; and she ask me if such a sport is befitting a woman. Well, in my opinion, it certainly is not if the result Is to be as she pictures it. But is it so inevitable that it will be so? There is a distinct danger of the animal element being developed to excess in games where the contestants come into physical contact in the struggle. Football is the handiest and one of the best instances. The contest in a large measure is a hand-to-hand fight, with certain restrictions as to how the muscular force is to be applied and directed. These restrictions are generally fairly observed, but often with difficulty, for immediately one man gets another in his grip and it is a question of muscle against muscle the animal instinct rises superior to every other, the same instinct which leads two dogs to end their gambols in a fight. Physical contact seems invariably to beget the brutal element. In cricket, or tennis, or any other game where it is absent the competition, though every bit as keen, never degenerates into an unseemly wrestling match. So, to take another example, there is not the least doubt that the use of long reaching - weapons has lessened in a measure the brutality of war. In the old times, when they had practically to grapple with their enemy, they did so in a frenzy of hate and fury. And is it not when these passions have been most aroused that the feeling is to abandon the rifle and "get at him?” But as a rule the mile or two miles between the foes has a marvellously cooling effect on our animal passion. Britons and Boers, firing - at one another from a 'long range, play the game with little of that rancour which would inflame every drop of blood in their veins were they locked in one another's arms; and after the battle they meet often more like friends than-foes. Eliminate the element of physical contact from your game and you at once elevate it. The advice applies as much to the pastimes of women as to those of the opposite sex, for even in the gentler natures the tiger is not altogether dead. I should say to the ladies, avoid those contests which by their character incite to a direct personal struggle. As I am told by those who know the game well, ladies’ hockey should not be played as 1 have seen it played here. It is not a counterpart of football, with wild rushes and disorderly hustling over the length and breadth of the field. The disposition of the forces on either side and the strict adherence to the rules governing their movements should preclude almost entirely the element of roughness.