HL Deb 18 July 1904 vol 138 cc231-45
* THE EARL OF WEMYSS

My Lords, I rise, in accordance with the notice standing in my name on the Paper, to call attention to the armament and position of the Yeomanry in relation to the Regular cavalry, and to ask who is responsible for the Lovat Scouts having been kept together as a fighting unit in South Africa. I may say at once that I am no Yeoman. Very near and dear relations of mine have commanded Yeomanry regiments, but I have no personal interest in the Yeomanry further than this, that I have always looked upon the Yeomanry, if properly organised, as one of the most excellent forces we have for defending the country against invasion. I may tell your Lordships, in strictest confidence, that I am not a member of the blue-water school. I believe we ought to be independent of the Navy in regard to home defence, and the Navy itself, according to the blue-water school, is not prepared to defend us against possible raids. I can conceive nothing more disagreeable than a raid of 10,000 men landing on our shores. I want to see my country safe alike against raids and against invasion of the style of the Roman or Norman invasions. Therefore, I am glad we have such a force as the Yeomanry, who have shown their capacity in the recent war. What is wanted is that they should be properly organised, armed, and equipped.

The Yeomanry were originally what was called "The Hunter Horse"; that is to say, they were men who could ride across country and formed themselves into Yeomanry; and I think my noble and gallant friend, the late Commander-in-Chief, who I see sitting on the Cross Benches, will back me up when I say that a finer force than the Hunter Horse if properly organised and equipped, it: would be impossible to conceive. There are, I believe, over 200 packs of hounds in this country, and if each hunt produced a certain number of men, those men would be able to go across country in a way that no foreign Army could. We may then look upon the Yeomanry as having always been cavalry; they have always dressed after the cavalry pattern, they were equipped and armed like the cavalry. They have always been cavalry and not mounted infantry. But what happened when they offered their services in the late war? They were by some authority at the War Office—I do not know who—turned practically, as regards their title, into infantry. They were troops up to then, but they went out to South Africa as companies. And why? Simply as far as I can ascertain, because they carried the long rifle.

This long rifle question takes one a very long way back, back to the years 1859 and 1860. At that time the question was raised whether cavalry should or should not be armed with the long rifle instead of with the carbine. In the discussion we then had with cavalry officers upon this point they used to maintain that the carbine was the only suitable fire-arm for cavalry—But when met with this statement: "You and I have got to fight a cruel. We are placed somewhere in the country, three miles apart. We are to fight and kill each other. Which will you have in that case—the long infantry rifle, or the cavalry carbine?" The answer was immediately: "In that case I would take the long infantry rifle." Your Lordships will hardly believe it, but this same argument had to he used as regards breech loaders and muzzle-loaders at the time when the adoption of the breech-loader was in question. And it has been shown that our cavalry were sent out with arms that were useless, with weapons with which it was impossible to return the long-range fire of the Boers. The cavalry now are going to be armed with the long rifle and the carbine will be relegated to that museum in the banqueting hall of the Royal Service Institution—that building with the beautiful ceiling by Rubens, which I think might be put to a better use—where all these obsolete arms and uniforms are sent. But what has not been agreed upon is how the long rifle is to be carried.

Here, again, we come to a very old question. I hold in my hand a letter, dated 1871, which refers to the best way of carrying a rifle. I say, unhesitatingly, as a practical man, having had a good deal to do with carrying the rifle when deer-stalking, that the one thing a man on horseback desires is to have the weight off his own person and put on to the horse. In 1871 there was a force in this country, which has since been allowed to die by the War Office, called Bower's Hampshire Horse. That was the most perfect mounted force the world has seen. They carried a long rifle in a way convenient to themselves, and they carried the sword not on the horse but on their person, in a belt. Here is a description, which perhaps your Lordships will allow me to read, of this force. It is from a letter written in 1871 by myself— As a force for home defence a large portion of it (the Yeomanry cavalry) might, by a different system if drill and training, become the finest Irregular cavalry in the world. The model on which they should be thus reconstituted is that of Colonel Bower's Hampshire Mounted Rifles. Whoever has had the good fortune to see this admirable corps at work, riding across country, carrying their long range rifles attached to their saddle in a bucket, with as little inconvenience to themselves or horses as a hunter does his horn, taking every fence that comes in their line as readily as if with hounds, and threading their way through thick woods and spinnies, dismounting to skirmish, and firing from behind hedges, houses, trees, or other cover, then remounting and galloping at a racing pace two or three miles at a stretch, either in advance or retreat, or changing front to open fire on a flank, will readily endorse the opinion of Colonel Brendon, R.A. I was present with Colonel Brendon when he inspected this regiment. He was an Artillery Officer from Portsmouth, and this is what he said at the close of the inspection— He had come to the ground with a vague idea of the duty he had to perform, and his surprise was not less than his pleasure. It might be heresy in him to give his opinion of the inevitable fate of ordinary cavalry opposed to such a system; and artillery, while exposed to destruction, could not touch such assailants n their scattered and hidden formation. That was the model which then existed. There were fifty in the corps, but they dropped to forty, and the War Office gradually allowed them to die out altogether.

But, my Lords, they are not quite dead. I hold in my hand a newspaper cutting from the Hampshire Chronicle, sent me by Colonel Bower, who is now, by the way, ninety-five, and as fresh as paint, containing an account of a meeting quite recently of the Hants Carabineers' Imperial Yeomanry— Another interesting competition was between Mr. Richard Westbrook equipped and carrying his rifle in the style of Colonel Bower's old Droxford Light Horse, and Lieutenant Alexander (I.W. troop) carrying the rifle as it was carried in South Africa. The competitors were mounted, and in the course had to take three hurdles, dismount, fire, remount, and ride back again. The result was the easiest of wins for Mr. Westbrook, whose time was 58 seconds as compared with 124 seconds occupied by Lieutenant Alexander. Colonel Bower, although ninety-five years of age, was personally present (during part of the afternoon. At the end of another article in the same newspaper the following reference is made to this trial— Another feature of the Droxford equipment was the frog belt for carrying the sword, by the use of which it was found cavalry swords were no impediment to men skirmishing on foot. Not only at drills and official inspections and visits, but in riding and shooting competitions, Colonel Bower and his Droxford Light Horse put their method to practical tests. I recommend that, also, to the kind consideration of my noble and gallant friend the late Commander-in-Chief.

My noble friend Lord Donoughmore referred the other day to a photograph I had shown him. I have had a dozen of them printed. There they are (placing them on the Table) for the benefit of any noble Lords who may wish to see them. I have ridden over fences and can testify to the fact that nothing can be more convenient than the way of carrying the rifle shown in the photograph. The rifle cannot he jerked off by any bucking horse if it is thus carried in the Namaqua bucket, nor the rider thrown, and lie can take out the rifle in an instant. I really hope the noble Earl the gallant Field-Marshal will take this matter into his serious consideration. I have been in communication with the Inspector of Cavalry upon it, arid I hope he, too, will go down and see Colonel Bower's experiment. If any of your Lordships are sufficiently interested in this question to go down and see it, a day can be appointed for you to meet Mr. Richard Westbrook, equipped and carrying his rifle in this style. I go further, and say it is the duty of the War Office and those interested in the efficiency of our cavalry to go and see is in practice.

The other matter I refer to in my notice is the question of the Lovat Scouts. Lord Lovat and I, unconsciously, were working at the same time at the same thing. We had the disadvantage, at the commencement of the war, of experiencing what were called "regrettable incidents," like that at Magersfontein. When these regrettable incidents took place through blind blundering, I had a strong feeling that what was wanted were men who knew how to use the telescope. Your Lordships will hardly believe it, but our Army was sent out to South Africa with hardly a telescope among them. They had, no doubt, field-glasses magnifying twelve times; but my old deer-stalking glass used to magnify thirty-five times. So clear was the atmosphere, a member of Lord Lovat's scouts told me they saw quite a dozen miles away, a body of Boers marching along a hillside. They looked at them with their deer-stalking glasses, and the question was whether these men were twelve or fourteen miles away. That gives your Lordships a notion of what a telescope can do in that climate; but, notwithstanding that, our soldiers, as said, were sent out without telescopes. After Magersfontein a General—I will not say who—wrote to Sir David Gill, the Astronomer Royal at the Cape and said— For God's sake send me as many telescopes as you can. I know, as regards Lovat's Scouts, that one General—one of the good Generals out there—after he had inspected these scouts, said— Until I saw you at work I had no idea of the use that a telescope could be in war. It was a telescope that enabled the Duke of Wellington to win the battle of Assaye and cross the Douro, and your Lordships know well the picture of him, painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence, with blue frock coat and telescope in hand. Yet one hundred years afterwards the British Army went to war without telescopes, and a British General admitted that he was not aware of the use of telescopes in war!

Seeing all this, I felt strongly that what was wanted were scouts who knew how to stalk, men who knew the use of the telescope; for, after all, a soldier is nothing but a man-stalker, and the same qualities are necessary to make a man a good soldier and a good scout as are necessary to make him a good deerstalker. I wrote a letter to The Times on this subject, in which I asked— Why don't they send out Highlanders, scouts accustomed to deer-stalking? And the next day Lord Lovat, whom I had not the pleasure of knowing before, came to me and said— What you have suggested I am busy doing. I am already forming such a body of men, And a very good body of men they proved to be. But my Question refers to another matter. The last thing that came into my head, or into the head of any sensible person, the last thing that could have entered Lord Lovat's head when he was getting this corps together, was that they would be kept together, like any other body of troops, as a fighting unit. The idea was that they should be the eyes of the Army and be scattered about in different directions. But they were kept together. I asked one of these scouts how this came about, and he said it was due to the action of the authorities. I asked which authorities, the authorities here or the authorities out there, and he replied— The authorities out there. I have heard since that the authorities here and the authorities in South Africa differed on this point, but the latter had their own way and the men were kept together. A speech was made by my noble friend Lord Lovat in the Highlands which explains the whole thing so far as his knowledge goes, and I had intended quoting it. As however, the noble and gallant Lord is here to-night it would be absurd for me to read extracts from his speech; but I believe I am justified in asking how it happened that the Lovat Scouts were kept together as a fighting unit, and upon whom the responsibility of such a waste of power rests.

LORD LOVAT

My Lords, I rise with considerable reluctance to address your Lordships. I have very distinct views, and have not hesitated to express them on this subject, and I should be very sorry if, through not being accustomed to public speaking, I should say one word more than the case justified about any corps with which I have been associated. But as Lord Wemyss has asked me to do so, I will state exactly the manner in which the Lovat Scouts were treated, and how this question arose. Immediately after Magersfontein, in December, 1899, I went to the War Office and offered to raise a body of men, with ten or twelve officers and six or eight trained telescope men, stalkers, and others from the Highlands. This offer was rejected, the War Office informing me that they could only deal with units. They insisted that there should be 116 men, a bugler, two shoeing-smiths, and some farriers; and they declined to deal with any other force except a force thus composed. Accordingly I went out to South Africa with two units such as they desired me to raise.

I would like to put Lord Wemyss right by saying that there was no chance, when once in South Africa, of dividing these units. The responsibility as to their organisation in units rests entirely with the War Office here. I did not take as many stalkers as I would otherwise have taken; I only took sufficient to do the work for these companies. In order to meet the War Office views I went in for picked shots. If the force had been organised as I had intended, and only stalkers had been taken, I consider that they would have been of very much greater use. I say this for two reasons. In the first place, as is well known, on the whole of the Colenso side there were only three officers at one time who were able to use the telescope efficiently. I think that if some thirty or forty good men had been distributed throughout the Army the work would have been done a great deal more efficiently. There is an other reason why I think the men could have done better service if they had been split up. On very many occasions we lent from the Lovat Scouts telescope men to various batteries, and as they asked for these men again in subsequent actions, I take it they were satisfied with the work the men did. On the point brought forward by Lord Wemyss as to the work of advance guards, I can only say this, that in two and half years experience I never knew any advance guard, possessing men with telescopes, which ran into the enemy. On each occasion that traps or ambuscades were laid they were discovered, not at two miles, as was generally the case, but at seven miles.

I have nothing further to add with regard to the regiment with which I am associated, but I would like just to say one or two words on the subject of telescopes in war. I do not believe that the War Office have realised the necessity, especially in an open country, of the telescope in war. It is certain that in the clear atmosphere of South Africa, provided climatic influences were favourable, a single horseman could be detected up to a distance of fourteen miles, a number of troops on the march and camps of white tents could be distinguished up to twenty or twenty-one miles, and a man's head and shoulders above an intrenchment at 7,000 yards. The magnifying power of the stalkers' glass runs to thirty-five times, but with the glass used by the forces in South Africa you cannot see equally well up to half that distance. There is another reason for substituting entirely the telescope for the glass now used. I know the present glass is very much easier learnt, and I do not think any man, unless he has had six months study, can do any good with the telescope. I found on several occasions when I issued telescopes to men who had no previous training that it was necessary to take them back and give them the ordinary glasses. They did better work, untrained, with the latter.

There is great need for increasing our powers of vision in the British Army. We continually blundered, quite unnecessarily, into the enemy in South Africa. Our artillery, on many occasions, fired on our own men, as also did the cavalry and infantry, and on several occasions I saw the artillery wasting hundred of shells in searching positions. Both of these errors would have been avoided by the use of proper telescopes. I would say that the first step for the War Office to take is to entirely abolish the obsolete telescopes that are now in use. The telescope they issued to me during the second year of the war, when drawn out to the full length, was 4 feet 11 inches. It was perfectly useless except on a stage. It weighed three times as much as the ordinary glass, and I understand it cost a good deal more than the glasses that one can buy at the Co-operative Stores. No doubt a man must be trained in the use of the telescope, but it is safe to say that a certain number of men go into the Army every year who have had some training with the telescope, before they join, and if they were discovered and put into the artillery, cavalry, or those branches of the service in which the telescope is most essential, some advantage might be gained. If we are unable to get trained men in the Army, there is no reason why a certain number of trained Scottish stalkers should not be maintained, by paying them a fee or by other means, as a sort of Reserve to be attached to batteries in time of war. There can be no difficulty in maintaining a small force like this. These men, I suggest, could be attached to the Intelligence Department to help the advance guard in the line of march, and they could do outpost work with the troops when halted, or assist the general in seeing at great distances.

* EARL ROBERTS

My Lords, the noble Earl who began the debate brought forward two points—the equipment of Yeomanry and the employment of Lovat's Scouts. The last point my noble friend Lord Lovat has, I think, explained away. Lovat's Scouts were not employed as scouts in South Africa because they were not sent out to me as scouts. When the Yeomanry came out some were called sharpshooters, some roughriders, and some scouts. I saw Lovat's Scouts for the first time at Kroonstad in May, 1900, and I inspected them there. Lord Lovat never said anything to me about their being scouts, and I gather from what my noble friend has stated that the men were not specially trained as scouts. I would certainly never have thought of employing men sent out as Yeomanry, as they were, who were perfectly unacquainted with the country, on the very difficult work of scouting. I employed men of the country whenever I could get them. With regard to the arms of the Yeomanry, I have seen a photograph placed on the Table by Lord Wemyss, and I admit it shows a pleasant way of carrying the long rifle. Moreover, I think it is the way it will have to be carried, as I said the other day, in peace time. In time of peace our men are not dressed for service, and to put the rifle on their backs in full dress would be ridiculous. It would wear out their clothes and make them very uncomfortable. For these and other reasons I should say that the proper way to carry the long rifle is very much like that shown in this photograph—namely, in a bucket on the saddle. But I am perfectly satisfied that when men go on service the rifle must be carried on their backs.

THE EARL OF WEMYSS

When under fire.

* EARL ROBERTS

When in front of the enemy. That was the order I gave in South Africa—that when they got near the enemy the rifle should be put on the man's back, so that if his horse was killed or wounded he would have his rifle free. With regard to telescopes I can assure the noble Lord that I have used a telescope myself from my very early days of soldiering. I have no sight with one eye, and therefore a binocular would have been of no use to me. I have therefore always used a telescope, and I believe that it is of great advantage that officers particularly should use telescopes. It takes some time to learn to use them, and it would be useless to give them to all ranks; but it would be a great advantage if a certain number of officers and men, especially those belonging to the artillery and cavalry, were provided with telescopes. I feel sure that the suggestion will be taken up by the War Office, and that a certain number of men will be supplied with telescopes and taught how to use them.

* THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Earl of DONOUGHMORE)

My Lords, after the speech of the noble and gallant Field-Marshal I do not think I need detain your Lordships more than a few minutes in replying to the discussion which has been raised by the noble Earl. Four subjects have been touched upon, and in respect of three of them I have received no warning whatever in the notice standing on the Paper; but I make no complaint. With the exception of the question of telescopes and the employment of Lovat's Scouts, the other matters raised have been discussed previously this session, and I have very little to add to what has already been said. As regards the question of equipment, opinions are very much divided as to where exactly a cavalryman should carry his rifle and how he should carry it, and we are not prepared to give a decision on the point until we have received the result of the experiments which are now proceeding at Aldershot with the equipment known as the Patterson equipment, which, I believe from what I have seen in the newspapers, is the equipment that has been adopted by Lord Kitchener in India. It is an equipment designed to ensure that the weight of the rifle shall be shared by the man and the horse. We have not yet received any reports upon it, and until this equipment has been thoroughly inquired into it would obviously not be wise to give a final decision on the point. I can, however, assure your Lordships that we are extremely anxious to reach this final decision. Over these experiments no time will be wasted, but we must allow a sufficient interval for them to be carried out, and the War Office will come to a decision upon them with the least possible delay.

With regard to what Lord Lovat said on the subject of telescopes, I am entirely in agreement with him, and I can assure him that the authorities at the War Office fully understand the importance of this question. We are very much alive to it, and I will have the question of the length of the telescope inquired into and see if something cannot be done in the direction both of lightening and shortening the instrument. The noble Lord mentioned that there were only three officers on the Colenso side able to use the telescope, but he omitted to take into consideration the fact that there were on that side a number of sailors experienced in telecope work; and in this connection I may be allowed to remain your Lordship that one of the witnesses before Lord Elign's Commission bore testimony to the usefulness, in long-range firing, of the telescopes used by the sailors. As to the suggested Reserve of stalkers, we already have a considerable number of stalkers in the new regiment which Lord Lovat had raised. I remember spending several pleasant hours last year in Perthshire in the noble Lord's regiment, and I am confident that these men will be of great use to us in any future war.

Now I come to the question who is responsible for Lovat's Scouts being kept together as a fighting unit in South Africa. The answer has, I think, already been given. I presume they were kept together on the authority of the Commander-in-Chief, but we have no record on the point. I am not surprised that we have no record, as it was obviously not for the War Office to dictate to the Commander-in-Chief in the field as to how he was to use his troops. With regard to the decision that was come to in London when the noble and gallant Lord originally made up his mind to raise this corps of stalkers, there again I am not able to give any information, for I find that, with the exception of a formal application, the negotiations were carried on by word of mouth between Lord Lovat and a distinguished officer at the War Office. There is no record whatever of the reasons which led to the decision not to send them out in the form originally suggested by the noble and gallant Lord. I should imagine myself that the reason was that the climate and atmosphere in South Africa were very different from Scotland, and that it was considered that the best people to use as scouts were local people accustomed to the light and atmosphere of the country. I think I have dealt with all the points that have been raised.

THE EARL OF ROSEBERY

I only rise to ask the noble Earl on Question. Did Lord Lovat correctly describe the telescope which is now being issued to the British Army?

* THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

I said that I did not know, but that I would inquire.

THE EARL OF ROSEBERY

I beg the noble Earl's pardon. I did not catch that.

THE EARL OF ERROLL

My Lords, I should like to say a word with regard to what fell from the noble Earl who initiated this discussion as to the Yeomanry being entirely trained as cavalry. That hardly expresses the present mode of their training. It takes certainly a couple of years to make a good cavalry soldier, and I think it is impossible to expect Yeomanry, who are only trained for about fourteen days every year, to become really efficient cavalry. I was much struck a day or two ago by a Reuter's telegram from St. Petersburg to the following effect— The Russians are beginning to regret that they spent so much time in exercising with the bayonet"—(and, I conclude, with the sword)—"and that they have not paid sufficient attention to their shooting. This lesson, the result of very bitter experience in the field, I think we ought to treat with a certain amount of consideration. I think the Yeomanry will be the first to recognise that in the future their principal weapon must be the rifle, and that the time spent in their sword exercise is more or less a waste of time.

I remember two years ago, in inspecting Yeomanry regiments, that a great deal of the time was spent in marching past and in the practice of the sword exercise. I venture to think that the method of training which has been adopted during the last two or three years, in which scouting and reconnaissance and the use of the rifle have been taught, is a very great advance on anything we had in the old days. There is great difference of opinion among Yeomanry officers themselves as to what their second weapon ought to be. No one will accuse me of any hostility to the Yeomanry or of any want of sympathy with them, and it is just because I have this sympathy with the Yeomanry that I should like to see them develop on what I imagine to be the right lines, shake off all prejudices, and keep up to modern requirements. With regard to the method of carrying the rifle shown in the photograph placed on the Table by Lord Wemyss, I believe this is a very good way of carrying it; but, if the man has a sword, it will be extremely difficult for him to use the sword with his rifle carried in this manner.

* THE EARL OF WEMYSS

My Lords, I should like to say one word in reply to the remarks which fell from the noble Earl the Under-Secretary. The noble Earl said that the whole question as to, the manner in which the rifle should be carried is now before a sub-Committee at Aldershot.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

Not before a sub-Committee; but experiments are going on at Aldershot.

* THE EARL OF WEMYSS

Well, I hope the War Office will send someone down to see the equipment to which I have referred. With regard to the telescope, the Coastguard have an excellent short telescope, the magnifying power of which is quite twice as great as that of the glass at present used in the Army. I would advise my noble friend to go to the Admiralty, who have revolutionised and now apparently control the War Office, and see if they cannot supply a much better telescope at a cheaper rate than that now being issued by the War Office. It may amuse your Lordships to know how I first became acquainted with the defect in the matter of equipping the Army with telescopes. Sir Alfred Horsford came over from Aldershot for our Wimbledon meeting, and he said— I wish the Duke of Cambridge would order Sir James Scarlett to prevent me getting into Aldershot. The order was given, and I went with Sir Alfred Horsford when he tried to get in. We came to a point with hills above us, on which there was a mass of something, but there was no means of knowing with the naked eve what it was, and in the whole of that force there was not a single glass of any kind. It turned out afterwards that these were ordinary spectators, carriages and carts. I only mention this as showing the importance of forces being equipped with telescopes. I recollect also that at subsequent manœuvres in Wiltshire I got off my horse, when on the right of the defending Army, took out my deer-stalking telescope, and saw the opposing Army flanking round the defending Army. I said to the officer commanding the videttes of the defending Army, "Is anything stirring here?" and he replied, "No, all is quiet here." That, again, shows the absolute necessity of telescopes.

The subject then dropped.