The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-12-20
NEWS OF THE GREAT BATTLE.
Incomplete Reports Received Show
the Work of the Censor.


New York, Dec. ia dispatch to the
Herald from London says: AT last de-
tails Of the sbattae at Tugela river are
4 coming through, baf it is very slowly
/ and the stories are most Incomplete.
The dispatches bear evidence of be-
! ing severely censored. For instance
General Buffers official, report stated
that he had lost eleven guns, but this
! fact has been carefullyacu out OF every
message by the censor, who evidently
was in ignorance of what news the
war office had given to the public.
/ We now know that General Hart S
brigade did actually cross the Tugela,
/ but had TO be withdrawn, losing very
heavily; that General Hildyard's bril-
gade was also checked. and that Cen
eral Barton's brigade, of whose doings
nothing had been heard, failed TO carry
Inhlawe hill, which is a position on the
south side of the Tugela to the west
of Colenso.
Thereis no further explanation of the
loss of the artillery. 1t is said that
Colonel Long who has been much
blamed for taking his guns too near
the Beers, was probably obliged TO do
so In this connection it is pointed out
that Colonel Long has the reputation
of being a very good officer. We are
expressly told the reason-namely, that
he was anxious to get within effective
range of the enemy.
ut is the old, old story" said an ar
tillery expert. 1.-THE officers and gun
ners of the Royal artillery are second
to none, but their guns are obsolete.
1t is certain that-the reverse which
of late has been suffered by the Brit
ish have been for the most part the re-
suit of imperfect scouting-not mere
ly the general scouting duties, which
are under the direction of the head
quarter staff, but of the duties of which
the generals commanding brigades, the
colonies commanding battalions and
regiments, and the majors and captains
commanding batteries and companies
are responsible.
The British officer is, as a rule. es-
pecially in the early part of a cam
paign. so keen to get at his work and
so eager to join issue at once with the
enemy that he is very apt to forget or
to hurry over the preliminary precau-
ticnary measures.
so much depends upon Lord Rob-
erts and Lord Kitchener that it is to
be hoped, says the Daily Mail, that
no further war office red tape and none
of the jealousies between generals that
are said to exist There will tie the
hands of the new chiefs. In the i'm
portant matter of artillery. if the two
men VINO go tOrtn under Eucn immense
national responsibility think it neces-
sary that they should have the best
artillery that England, America of Ger
many can provide, let them have it.
And the government should insist
that Sir Michael Hicks Beach shall be
no longer allowed to further sacrifice
officers and men in South Africa by
his hopeless notions of imperial
finance"
Many letters written to the London
papers direct criticism against some de-
p9rfments of the war office. and against
Sir Michael Hicks-Beach. General Bull
Ter and Lord Wolseley. In the eyes of
many Lord Wolseley is held respon-
sible for maintaining his position as
oTnmander-in-ch chief for several years.
knowing as he must have known. that
the antiquated British artillery would
be outraged on its first meeting with
any adequately armed force.