The Anaconda standard., 1899-11-17
TO CLEAN CARPETS.

something near to equality. The Ger
man contention for the attack is based
of course almost solely upon the better
morale of charging troops. 1t is harder
to lie still and be shot at than to run
forward and shoot.
The war in South Africa ought also
to show whether or not cavalry has
been relegated to the position of an en-
tirely subsidiary arm, good only for
purposes of scout, reconnaissance and
pursuit. For some years infantry writ
ers have declared that as battle fac
tor it has been eliminated. This con-
tention seems to be based almost who'll
ly upon the disastrous charge Of the
French cuirassiers at Gravelotte. This
is the charge which Wrung from old
Wilhelm the grudging tribute: 1T is
magnificent, but it is not war;" The
F'ranco-P Prussian war, which happened
nearly 80 years ago, is the last con-
test from which any deductions affect
ing cavalry can be drawn, for the rea-
son that in the Turko- Russian war
this arm was enabled to play only a
relatively unimportant part. 1t is true,
however, as cavalrymen point out, that
in the march on Paris the value of
cavalry was demonstrated more than
once, even though the cuirassier charge
did fail. AT Vionville Bredow's six
French infantry at small loss, crushing
a very threatening formation. Again
in this battle they went over the
French cannon, sabering the men at
the guns, and they lost only so riders.
The explanation of this is found in
that fact that the charge was dellv-
cred with such rapidity, the ground
being favorable, that the French gun
ners found it impossible to depress
their pieces with sufficient sWiftness to
preserve the range. Later on So squad
rons of Bredow's men crumpled up the
70 tysNr jf,nc fhn1 haI
per That this crumpled infantry was
of the highest class was proved two
days afterward by the further fact
that it took one entire division of Ger
man footmen three hours to go through
them at a, loss of 1000 men, or one
third of the attacking force.
Argument in Favor of Cavalry.
In support of their contention for the
value of their arm in battle cavalry
men adduce the following argument:
Troops formerly We're held in reserve
500 yards back of the firing line. Now
for $500 yards back of this point the
ground is ripped by modern projectiles.
Consequently it is now necessary to
hold reserve troops 1900 yards back of
the firing line. When ordered forward
they must cross this danger zone, Ak
posed every moment to bullets. Infan-
trymen cannot cross 1t in less than 20
minutes, and their loss is bound to he
heavy. Cavalrymen can cross it in SIX
minutes at the outside. Moreover, be-
cause of the speed of their advance
their range alters radically every 10
seconds, and troops in defense cannot
possibly alter the sights on their rifles
to meet these rapid changes. The firing
of the defense line will consequently be
guesswork and in almost all instances
too high. They estimate that the loss
of cavalry in straight charge over
favorable ground ought not to exceed
one-third of the proper loss of infantry
in a similar charge. Furthermore, they
attach much Importance to the moral
effect upon opponents of laundering
charge of horse thrown straight at the
guns.
AS the Beers are good horsemen and
we'll mounted. and as both the British
lights and "heavies" are supposed 20
be the best of their kind in the world,
the experts are counting upon the de-
velopment of some valuable cavalry
facts in the first African battle in
which mounted troops are extensively
used. Not the least interesting part CT
any war is the military scientific part
of it, and in every civilized country of
the globe to-day the students are fig
uring with pencil, pen and drawing in
struments. and waiting for the demon
stration or disproof of their theories.