406 
FIELD ARTILLERY PROGRESS. 
away all sense of responsibility, and destroy the germs of a military 
spirit: we take a course which no employer of labour, or master, would 
dream of doing, and we reap our reward in the helplessness and ignor¬ 
ance of many men who under a better system would make excellent 
soldiers. It is a libel on the men of the regiment to say that it is 
necessary, though of course innovations would at first lead to some 
irregularities. Naturally, recruited as our army is, there are some men 
incapable of being influenced by any good motive; but they can be 
got rid of, and I am confident the morale of the regiment would receive 
an enormous impulse if all ranks were in their degree more trusted and 
made responsible for their actions. 
On the whole, however, it would be hypercritical to find serious fault 
with the discipline and drill of the corps, with all that leads to success 
and renown in peace. There are motives enough to push us to 
excellence in these points. It is pleasant to hear a chorus of praise of 
ourselves and of our corps; but it is just when all men speak well of 
us we are in danger of relaxing our efforts—we think to-morrow shall 
be as to-day, and are satisfied to ask no more. 
Unhappily, success in war and success in peace are by no means the 
same thing. In peace we demand pomp and circumstance, polish, 
glitter, fat horses, perfection in parade movements; and we get them 
because they are things that pay. In addition, we get a certain 
amount of field movement and gunnery, ever varying in kind and 
degree, to meet the views of our immediate chiefs. The efforts made 
in this way are individual; efforts to promote a better state of things; 
but they attain only partial success, because there is no settled regi¬ 
mental public opinion to back them. 
I do not undervalue the improvement in knowledge of gunnery that 
has taken place in late years. I know that much pains has been 
devoted here and there to the subject, and the general level of instruc¬ 
tion has been raised; but our needs of better instruction have increased 
in a greater proportion, and I assert that our efforts are spasmodic and 
disorganised, that our knowledge is too much a matter of theory only, 
to be rubbed up now and then for an inspection or for an annual 
practice, and not like our drill and ordinary routine, a part of ourselves. 
There is no need to dwell upon details, or to seek for instances. 
Will it not be generally allowed that the sort of question and answer 
gunnery that too often obtains, the dead level of important and unim¬ 
portant details, the inefficiency of our annual practice, all betoken but 
a listless belief in the necessity for good shooting, or at least in the 
need of any active efforts to acquire it ? 
How then shall we add to the efficiency we have already reached the 
further excellence that we need ? 
It is the listlessness of which I have spoken that is at the root of 
failure. If opinion in the regiment was convinced that good shooting 
was essential to success in war, and that it was worth while to work 
for it, the greater part of the difficulty would be overcome. 
We can do much for ourselves. Let us cease the eternal rivalry of 
spit and polish, and whilst not valuing appearance less, value shooting 
more. For the moment, at all events, we can rest and be thankful for 
