of the musket he so be-praised, it was officially declared, in 1846,
that “fire should never be opened beyond 150 yards, and certainly not
exceeding 200 yards,” for “at this distance half the number of shots
missed the target, measuring 11 feet 6 inches, and at 150 yards a very
large proportion also missed!”
It is but forty years since these ideas were held, and rightly; but it
is curious, none the less, to note the extraordinary advance the art
of killing men has made since then. In 1822 it is deliberately stated
in a French report that “thus infantry is only formidable at about
100 yards.” In 1852, and thereabout, there were marked improvements
in firearms, and this, notwithstanding the continuance of the reign
of peace the “Great Exhibition” was supposed to inaugurate, and the
ominous distant growl of the war-thunder that was arising in the East.
With nations of different national characteristics, and in different
stages of national development, the quietude of a peaceful power is
looked on as but a synonym for weakness. National decadence and a
peace-at-any-price policy run, as all history proves, on very much
the same rails; the latter spirit is called up to cover or excuse the
former. So it was that the long peace was broken. If Russia had really
thought she would have to fight four powers and a “benevolent neutral,”
she might have held her hand, but the “Manchester School” talked much,
and foreign powers are disposed always to take the outcry of the
hysterical few in England for the solid opinion of the silent many.
Some people, less influenced by the hysteria of those who, like the
Pharisee in the parable, air their opinions in the streets, or, like
Rudyard Kipling’s monkey-folk,--the “Bander-log,”--imagine, because
_they proclaim_, their proclamations must be true, were uneasy. The
best of the House of Commons were uneasy, and voted the Militia Bill,
which aimed at creating 80,000 permanent militiamen as a second line
of defence; a force that proved the justice of the view taken, by the
enormous help they gave the army when the new war began. It is saying
very little to assert that, without the militia from 1854 to 1856, we
could not have recruited the army at Sebastopol, any more than we could
have held our Mediterranean garrisons.
Then there was a certain Colonel Kinloch who was uneasy. And he found
relief for uneasiness by starting the second Volunteer Movement. The
first was when Napoleon threatened to invade us. He wrote a very
valuable, because impressive, pamphlet, which attracted attention, and
actually led to the formation of volunteer corps, which, of course,
had little support from the Government; all the more because they were
anxious about their own pet child, the new “Militia Bill.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account