GOLD MEDAL PRIZE ESSAY, 1894. 
339 
each, be examined and placed under one of tlie following four headings : 
(1.) March formations. _ Moments. 
(2.) Rendezvous formations. 
(3.) Formations necessary for movement. 
(4.) Fighting formation. 
All that cannot stand this test may, we venture to think, be classed 
as superfluous, and removed from our manual on the ground that the 
presence of unnecessary formations in our drill-book militates against 
simplicity, and encourages those so minded to devote time which could 
otherwise be expended usefully in the mastery of confusing and useless 
details. 
Most of us who have recently taken part in manoeuvres will admit Direction as 
the soundness of the remarks made by Colonel Maurice on the subject ^rsonai 0 
of the reconnoitring of artillery positions, when speaking at the discus- command, 
sion which followed the very interesting lecture delivered by Major 
Hughes, R.A., on the “ Okehampton Experiences of 1893.” With 
reference to the above subject, he says (p. 76, Yol. XXI., “ Proceed¬ 
ings” R.A. Institution for February, 1894) :— 
“ Anybody who has practically tried it will agree that whoever is in 
independent command, whether Brigade Division Commander or 
Battery Commander, has simply to be as far ahead as he can possibly 
get to be able to reconnoitre what the enemy is doing. The difficulty 
that Major Hughes speaks of ( tf Okehampton Experiences, 1893,” p. 
63, “ there seemed rather a dislike on the part of the Brigade Division 
and Battery Commanders to leave their commands and advance well 
ahead to reconnoitre the next position ”) is a most natural one, and is 
produced almost entirely by drill as opposed to manoeuvres.” 
Drill being the preparation for manoeuvres, situations that are likely Direction 
to occur in the latter should be foreseen and provided for in the former, sometimes 
_ , .. i . better than 
How, the training ot batteries or brigades may be carried out by two personal 
methods. By one of which the officer in charge assumes personal command - 
command, and orders all movements himself. By the other, he gives 
a junior officer a definite task to perform, allows him to carry it out in 
his own way, and on its completion criticises, if necessary, his method. 
In our Regiment the first is nearly always the one made use of, with 
the result that the commander of a unit, either from force of habit or 
distrust of his juniors, has a tendency to remain too closely attached to 
his command. 
By employing the second method, i.e., that of direction as opposed 
to personal command, he places himself in the position of an onlooker, 
from which standpoint he is better placed for observing the working 
of his command than when personally ordering its movements. He is 
also in a more favourable position for instructing his junior officers in 
the manner in which he would like them to carry on the command dur¬ 
ing his unavoidable absence. A combination of these two methods is, 
therefore, advocated as the best training for the manoeuvre ground. 
With regard to the Practice Camp at Okehampton, there is only one 
suggestion we would presume to offer. The necessarily technical 
nature of the Okehampton report renders it of little interest to the 
army at large, who on this account derive little benefit from the valu- 
