CO-OPERATION BETWEEN GUNS AND CAVALRY. 209 
there is an even more remarkable example still. We all know how 
splendidly the French cavalry fought on occasions in 1870, and what 
devotion and courage they displayed when assailing infantry in par- 
ticular, yet had they so little of the true cavalry spirit, that, when that 
gallant and celebrated charge was delivered by Marguerittes division 
on the Illy plateau at Sedan it was preceded by volleys of carbine fire. 
So much was this the case—so much smoke and explosion of firearms 
was there—that an eye-witness has told us that the German 5th Corps 
at first supposed that they had infantry in front of them.! 
British cavalry, gentlemen, have never been prone to such a fault, if 
they have erred at all, they have done so on the side of a too headlong 
valour, but nevertheless I say these chance examples remind us once more 
of the need which cavalry feels for the support of fire, and of the truth of 
Napoleon’s dictum “ Cavalry has more need of artillery than infantry, 
because it cannot reply to fire but can fight only with the steel.” 
But if artillery is to be the right arm, as it has been termed, of cavalry, 
it must be trained weekly or even daily with it, and the two should, if 
possible, learn to understand one another, not from the perfunctory 
study of one another’s text-books, but from that personal familiarity 
which is acquired to some extent at field days, but is fostered and de- 
veloped in a far larger degree, by life together in camp and barracks. 
(applause). And I dwell particularly on this point because owing to 
the changes in the armament of artillery which I have alluded to, there 
is an especial danger that Horse Artillery may now-a-days receive 
an one-sided education only. 
The power of the modern Horse Artillery gun is such that batteries 
cannot be allowed to stand idle during a great battle, and therefore 
modern Horse Artillery batteries, whatever may have been necessary 
in the past, must be trained and utilized in precisely the same manner 
as are field batteries; and they constitute in fact simply mobile Field 
Artillery. If experse and forage considerations were of no moment it 
would indeed be better to have all gunners mounted, and thus ease the 
horses. Mobility is the most vital characteristic which artillery should 
possess, and, leaving its use with the cavalry division altogether out 
of sight for a moment, it is in this respect that Horse Artillery is 
always valuable (loud applause). In a former lecture I spoke myself 
on this part of the subject, and quoted modern instance in support of 
what I said, and I do not wish to enlarge on it now—there is no time 
for me to do so—for the truth is as old as the hills, but I cannot help 
reminding you that at Dresden Napoleon had to double the teams 
which could not draw his guns by taking horses from the com- 
missariat wagons. At La Rothiere the artillery of Sacken’s Corps 
could not be got forward, and one-half had to be left on the ridge of 
Trannes, while all the horses took on the other half, and came back for 
the remainder. After Montmirail the Russian artillery could only be 
got off the field by harnessing 50 Hussars with long ropes to each gun. 
At Vauchamps when Grouchy got across Blacker’s line of retreat with 
\T found this statement in a series of ‘ Lectures on the three arms,” by Baron Seddeler of the 
Russian General Staff, published in the ‘“ Militar Wochenblatt”’ in the year 1878. 
29 
