SOLDIER'S TEETH

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2339, 22 December 1914, Page 8

SOLDIER'S TEETH

Of the administration of the War Office in respect of minor details (writes Sir Henry Lucy in the "Cornhill Magazine" for October) a Lancashire factoryowner, the employer of-90 men, told me a little' story that would' have been incredible prior to the publication of the evidence given before the Royal Commission. When'the campaign broke out a considerable, number "of tho hands volunteered, for. the front. A couple presented themselves at the recruiting | office. One was ' a prized workman, sober, industrious, strong, and healthy; the other, a -comparative weakling, who stood low in the scale of workmen. To tho delight of the mill-owner, who greatly grudged his prospective loss, the capable man returned' with the news that his companion had been accepted, whilst ho was rejected. The grounds for this action, were based on the fact that he had lost one of his front teeth, and was therefore ineligible for service in the British Army.

Musing over the mystery, it was remembered that formerly the army was furnished with muzzle-loaders, necessitating the biting off of tho cartridge before inserting it. ' Lack of a front tooth prevented a man performing this action, and a decree was promulgated forbidding the enlistment of any man so incapacitated. More than 20 years previous to the outbreak of the Boer war muzzle-loaders were abolished in the army. Every regiment was supplied with breech-loaders, which do not require the biting-off process that incidentally led to. the revolt of the Sepoys in India. Nevertheless the regulation, never having been withdrawn, was in force in 1900, and may be so to this day. . ..