Omaha daily bee., 1896-11-07
WHY ENGLAND Will NOT FIGHT.
The Argument of Her Pocket u
MhOIcsOmc Ncstrnint.

The Argument of Her Pocket u
Wholesome Restraint.
That noisy portion OF the British public
which is agitatlng for the use of force
against Turkey. says the st. James Ga
zette. appears to think that an Anglo
Turkish war would be something like the
bombardment of Alexandria, followed per-
haps by a sort of Rhodesian expedition;
that In a few weeks after we had blown
Constantinople to pieces the Turks would
come flocking in to beg for mercy and that
the Armenians would thenceforth flourish
forever in peace. Lord Salisbury however,
expressed the view some time ago that the
conquest OF Turkey would put us TO the pin
Of our collar, even IL Europe merely looked
on. Such figures as are available quite bear
out Lord Salsbury's opinion.
1t must be remembered that the physique
OF the Turks cannot be surpassed, and that,
although the army Is not organized up to
the standard of the great powers. 1t is both
numerous and brave. Further, a war over
the Armenian question would be no ordi-
nary war. 1t would involve the extinction
of Turkey as European power The Turks
know it, and no doubt they would fight to
the bitter end. Their troops, too, are
accustomed to continuous fighting with rob-
Der bands and to protecting difficult frou-
tier that they are always in a state of pre-
paredness to take the field They are well
armed with the Mauser rifle (made in Ger
many; many of their officers have been
trained in Germany; and, indeed, when the
German emperor visited Constantnople he
warmly complimented the troops on their
whole turnout. And it would appear that,
but for the chronic emptiness of the mill
tary chest, the Turkish army would be well
able to hold its own, at least in a war OF
defense against very formidable foe. The
actual figures OF the effective combatant
force are, in round numbers;
infantry 5N3OOO
cavalry 5h.uOO
Artillery $4,000
Engineers 1900
Total 75O.5OO
They are rather short of horses, but have
about 400 guns The navy does not count.
1t may be said that these are only arith-
metical soldiers and that, besides, Turkey
could not carry on a war In her bankrupt
condition. But we have the startling figures
of the Russo-Turkish war of 1SE7-7S to show
what Turkey can do She was then bank
rupt. Her troops were never paid. They
were not nearly so well armed as they are
now. Yet it was only after very severe
struggle that Russia, with all her hordes of
fighting men, came out victorious 1t is said
that in Europe 100000 Russians took part
in the campaign, and in Asia 100000. Their
losses were 81 900 deaths in Asia and 81 900
deaths in Europe, of which latter number
II 900 were killed in battle. In addition to
these terrible losses there were invalided
Ill Europe 0O,uUU anu WOuHueu III ASH II ,UUU.
Thus there were killed, wounded and in
valided a greater number than our whole
home army.
Now, is it probable that less number of
British troops than Russian would overcome
| the Turk? Suppose it is; suppose that
| Englishmen are to Russians as roast beef
and Scotch whisky are to black bread and
vodka, and that one English soldier could
take the place of two Russians. Still, how
| could we transport 800 900 fighting men to
|
generation. tho Egyptian campaign OF 1852,
| less than 10000 men we're engaged. That Is
about the number we keep on hand for foreign
| expeditions. And. with the possibility Of
| European complications and unrest in Ire
| land 1t Is about all we could safely spare In
wan with Turkey. Take another Russo
| Turkish figure. At the beginning of the
| siege of Plevna there were $4,000 draught
horses employed dragging up supplies. No
| doubt horses would be as necessary in
! English operations as in Russian. But how
could we transport &C 900 horses to Turkey
! and this would only be portion OF the total
required. We would even have a difficulty
| in procuring that number, not TO mention
| the transport of the animals in good health
| Our army has only about one-fOurth of II at
| home and in the colonies. Nearly as many
more are registered and available at twenty
| four hours notice. But II Is calculated that
| in the whole kingdom there are no more
| than 20 900 horses suitable for war and al
i
| be in the way OF getting at these. Lieu
tenant General Goodenough says II would
| take three weeks to dispatch 10000 horses
| by sea. During the Egyptian expedition the
military authorities were seventeen weeks
procuring 1,700 horses That was before the
system OF registration was commenced. But
after the 1900 or 5000 registered horses
available Immediately were despatched, the
very same difficulties would arise now as In
1882 over any required beyond that number.
For NJ Is only mature, muscular, cornfed
animals that would be worth shipping.
But even II we could send out, say, half
| a million or even a quarter OF million men
and 100, 900 horses, have any OF the agltators
considered what the cost would be? A
national army fighting in a foreign country
is very expensive body. The direct ex-
penditures would be enormous. Russia paid
for its victory in 1878 no less than $3.50, O0O,-
900. But We are about the most expensive
war makers in the world and 1t is doubtful
II we could achieve our purpose at this
price. France, in her fatal struggle, lost
f76 per family, which according to Sir
Robert Glffen is exactly ten years saw
ings. In our case the loss would certainly
fall on our own shoulders. We could beat
Turkey, no doubt, but We could not make IL
give us what II has not got In the last
seventeen years Turkey has reduced It's ma
tional debt by composition, fS5, 900 900, No
other proof of its poverty is needed. This
goo 900 expended on the war would
therefore be tackled on to our national
debt undoing all the achievements OF
sinking fund chancellors and raising the