Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-10-07
THE LESSONS OF WAR.
Those Of One Conflict Upset by Ex-
periences of tho Next

During recent years there has been a
great deal of discussion in army and news
paper circles about abolishing the sword
as part of the equipment Of an officer
and substituting therefor the revolver, upon
the ground that the sword, like the unrif1ed
cannon, had outlived Its usefulness" said
an army officer to a Star reporter.
This discussion was precipitated largely
by the results of the Boer war. 1t was de-
clared that the English army officer had no
use. or let us say, had slight for this
sidearm equipment. The weapon was con-
seQuently an incumbrance rather than Of
service, and being an fncumbrance should
be discarded
1.-The reason why the English army Of
ficers had little use for their swords in the
Boer war was because that war was q
long-range war, and the English seldom got
sufficiently close to the enemy to side
arms, but in the few hand-to-hand mix-ups
the respective belligerents really INDUCED
in the officers on both sides used their
swords to advantage. Some of the battles
Of this war were so peculiar by reason of
the volcanic conformation Of the territory
fought over. and the knowledge thereof by
the Beers that some of these encounters
were fought when the English couldn't see
so much as the top of a Beers hat but the
Beers saw the English. however, who were
then taking their first practical lesson of
the American Indian style of fighting and
nation in battle.
Naturally the sword was Of little service
to the officers. But there was another
story to tell regarding its efficiency in the
Of the Boer war writer's wasted lot of ink
In declaring that the day Of long distance
wars had really arrived. and that of hand
to-hand encounters had disappeared, to live
only as a memory when men went literally
up to the lannon's mouth and the sword
and bayonets point.
But in this, as In other things, they
were to be mistaken. The hand-to- hand
encounters In this last memorable contest
of nations We're numerous and sanguinary.
1t will be recalled that in some quarters
the abolition of the bayonet upon our rifles
was advocated. and. in view of the rapid
fire gun, these extremists might have gone
a point better and advocated the abolition
of the rifle itself upon just as logical
grounds as they did the officers sword,
and also the infantrymans rif1e-they did
strongly advocate the abolition of the cav
alryman's saber.
But the war between Russia and Japan
knocked all of these ridiculous arguments
about 'abolishing' everything in the side
arms line into a cooked hat and now our
government has finally acknowledged the
heretofore accepted fact that sharp hand
fighting instruments are still necessary
portion OF a soldiers field equipment. de-
spite the advances made in modern rifles,
ordnance and projecties.
Hence the advocates of the sword in the
United States army view with much quiet
satisfaction that the new sword bayonet
will be used on the new army magazine
rifle with which the army is now quite
fully equipped. And the cause of the adop-
ton of the sword bayonet Is given as being
because of Its great effectiveness as shown
In the Japanese war, in hand-to-hand fight
ing.
"This is great triumph for the officers
who advocated the retention of the sword
as a useful side-arm in an officers equip
effpctiVplv
upon the theories of the stay-at-homes
whose visions pictured only long-range
wars. and whose scale of argument ran
from the elimination of the sword to that
of the man himself and the entire substi-
tuition OF fighting machines therefor. Men
will count in the future as they have in the
past and the day of hand-to-hand fighting
IL very far from being passed"