OKEHAMPTON EXPERIENCES, 1893 . 
77 
I may next say just a word about that question of indirect laying, because I 
think from what I was told at Olcehampton that I used it this year more than it 
was used by any other Brigade Division. I think that the delay of which Major 
Hughes speaks is simply due to want of practice. It is obviously much harder 
at most stations to properly practice indirect laying than almost any other part 
of the preliminary work. In the case of a particular battery to which Major 
Hughes alludes, the circumstances of which I know very well, it was solely just 
those little points about the difference between the clinometer angle and the 
range-finders range for fuze purposes, which require to be mechanically taken 
from long practice, that were not attended to during that very absorbing time of 
range and fuze finding when the Battery Commander has his full attention taken 
lip in looking at his target and giving his successive orders for range and fuze. 
I believe myself that with a little more practice there would be very much less delay 
up to the first round than was the case this year. Indirect fire answered well 
and worked quickly, as Major Hughes says, as soon as it was fairly started. It 
would, under certain circumstances, be of such importance on service that I 
cannot help thinking it is worth taking some trouble to get it right. 
I now come to a subject oh which I want to speak at more length,- because, I 
am sorry to say, I dissent from almost every sentence in what Major Hughes has 
said about it, and therefore I know he will be glad that I should say what I have 
to say. He says : “ One heard a good deal about ‘distribution’ and ‘ concen¬ 
tration ’ at Okehampton this year. The subject has been so well thrashed out 
by Colonel Maurice and Major White, and finally summed up by Captain 
Granet, that there should be no more danger of considering dispersion and dis¬ 
tribution to be one and the same; nor should there be any further chance of 
anyone thinking that the advocates for ‘ distribution ’ desire to discard ‘ concen¬ 
tration ’ against a tactical point, the value of which is recognised by all.” The 
first thing to which I take objection is to the statement that “ The subject has been 
well thrashed out.” In order for a question to be thrashed out the points made on 
either side must be dealt with on the other. I certainly have not dealt with the 
points made by Major White because, apart from private conversation, I have 
not written or said one word about what Major White has put forth in his 
paper; and I think I may safely say that Major White has not touched the 
points that I made, as I think I can show. My points remain untouched, and 
it is a matter of such enormous importance to us, if I am right in my view of 
the question, that 1 am anxious that it should not be hastily dropped as having 
been satisfactorily disposed of. I believe that this room, with this audience, is 
the right place to deal with it and thrash it out. (Applause.) Major Hughes’ 
next words bring me to the points that I want to make. He says, “ There 
should be no more danger of considering dispersion and distribution to be one 
and the same; nor should there be any further chance of anyone thinking that 
the advocates for ‘ distribution ’ desire to discard ‘ concentration ’ against a tactical 
point, the value of which is recognised by all.” Now, I thought it just as well 
to bring with me Major WHite’s reply to me, and I think I can show, without 
detaining you too long, that one of the senses in which he uses the often very 
useful term “ distribution ” is precisely the thing which I call “ dispersion,” and 
of which I allege that it has led to disaster in every battle in which it has been 
tried, and that never except by the exact opposite of what he proposes has success 
by artillery been obtained. Many of you will no doubt never have seen the 
paper of mine to which Major WTite’s was an answer, and, therefore, I may 
perhaps venture to touch on some of the points which have not been dealt with 
before I come to the mode in which Major White refers to what I want to 
tackle. I can best put the case in a series of propositions. 
1. That, valuable as the experiences at Okehampton are, they may be made 
most dangerous if they are in no way referred to the experiences of war ; that 
