THE EASTER ENCAMPMENT.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1021, 13 April 1883, Page 2

THE EASTER ENCAMPMENT.

• TO THE EDITOR. SIR, : —I must' ask “permission to once move occupy space in your journal to reply to Captain Walkinton’s last letter, and regret to say I shall be compelled to trespass somewhat largely,. as jo r cppn.ect_tho “ attack- and defence - it-will be- necessary to quote largely from former letters. Capt W. begins his last letter very well indeed, as follows;—“‘War Correspondent’ having commenced in error seems inclined to back it up. 25 men dismounted should read 15. Twenty-five Wairoas marched into camp on Thursday, but other troopers arrived singly, some coming in purposely for the sham fight.” The mistake as to the number of men Capt W. dismounted certainly is not mine, as the figures 2 and 5 are very plainly printed in: 1 your version of his letter, so either you, Mr Editor, or Capt W. r are; answerable for this mistake ; neither could I be expected to know that troopers joined on purpose’for the sham fight, as we were given to understand, most unmistakeably,,that such, a proceeding would not b’e‘allowed. Capt W. then says f “ It is quite easy to dismount the whole of a squadron to act 'onTfoqt •; three men are quite suQicient to look after the horses.” I am not aware that I ever said it wasn’t—indeed, I have often seen cavalry men dismounted without any exertion on their-part, and even somewhat against their will at times. I asked for a precedent for dismounting and engaging the whole of . a cavalry force, as I.have not yet; heard of one. Then he says : “I should have been very much open to censure had T charged the disorganised infantry, ''supported as they were, and protected by: both cavalry and artillery, having no support at the-tirne to fall back on myself in case of disaster, than which nothing is more culpable.” This, Mr Editor, is scarcely a fair way of putting it. In Capt W.’s former letter he strongly objects to any of my 100 infantry coming to life to shoot his cavalry trotting gently out in front of them, saying that “surely the men who are shot first ought to die first hut he considers be would have been open to censure for charging infantry protected by the cavalry that he tells us in his- first letter he himself bad placed hors tie combat. I must.uow object to those cavalry being allowed to come to life again, and say that, knowing what he did, he had no right to be"afraid of tins particular lot of cavalry.*’’ And as to the protection afforded:by tlie artillery!! Is Capt W. an Englishman ? If so, I would ask him where he learnt to be afraid of a British officer opening, fire with artillery , on his own men ? Would any British .officer deliberately open fire with artillery on 150 of bis own .infantry (for (heir own support were in the line of fire at the time, and the artillery being on a level with, if not lower than, them, could not fire over them) on the off chance, at, the best, of killing 25 of the enemy'? Not quite, Capt Wthat is a little-too thin. At.any rate if Capt. W. could bring about such a state of affairs, it was clearly bis duty to do so at any cost, even if he knew that the whole of bis troop must perish, ns getting the enemy’s artillery'to ; help one to beat them is a chance not "to be missed. Again, Capt W. cannpTsny “he had no support.” Where wore llio 60 Nnvals who (according to Capt W.’s first letter) had, together with the Wairoas, been “ pounding away 7 at, this line of infantry from a place of the greatest security,” and consequently 7 wo may fairly assume, wore almost unhurt, and therefore surely available as a support. We then have the following :—“ Cavalry should only 7 act on foot where .they 7 can votxfiily retrain ihoir horses , wo avo not mounted infantry. Capt Summerville is not the officer likely to miss the chance of cutting me oil; from my 7 horses had I doubled out ami taken ground to my 7 left as ‘ War Correspondent ’ suggests ;• my 7 supports wore then tnking.gr.ound to the right, and my 7 duly was to ; not as support and cover (heir flank movement, as wellas ground and circumstances would allow,” The first part of this is a fact, no doubt, but the instruction for cavalry when required for skirmishing is ns near as I can remember just now—“On the command, Skirmishers out,”—-the troop or squadron detailed for that service will gallop out witl) swords drawn, and on completing (ho formation required, will return swords, draw carbines, and load ; not trot out gcully with their hands by (heir sides, ready to bo surprised by 7 an unexpected appearance of the enemy 7 at any moment. And hero again I. must object to Captain Soimucrville being 'brought to life again to prevent Capt W.’s men being extended on foot, but I must ask Capt W. to refer to tbe passage in my letter on this particular subject. I said: If (lie Wairoas were wanted for skirmishing, &c. ; I did not, suggest that they 7 were so required,as I hold an entirely'-oppbsite view. The latter part of this paragraph reads strangely after the former portion o£ the the letter as we have been told again and again that Capt W, had no support. Here ho says'“ my 7 ,suppqrters;wore,taking ground.” This then is curious ; Capt W. has no supports at the moment, they 7 are required, but immediately after “ tbe supports” take the ground to tlio rigid, and it suddenly becomes bis duty to support them,' “Any real attack I might' make on the fight defence would have been (

unsupported ; (lie merestnoyice in cavalry tactics knows wha’t/that • means.” Still tins cry of unsupported. ' 1 never advocated any “laid out plan” of real attack, but’, simply the taking advantage of, in my opinion, an opportunity that occurs once ; ipV.a life time, and to profit by. Sir Garnet Wolseley’s saying, “Happy is the man wbo/knows when to say ‘Up, guards, and at them.’ The opportunity passes in the twinkling of an eye ;■ there is no salvation for the man who cannot seize it,” Now we eorno to the parade business, and Capt W, opens the ball thusly : “The present precision of artillery practice confines all and more of “.War Correspondent’s ” easy and effective movements, (the prettiest movement of all he leaves umncntionccl, viz, reverse the front by the wheel about of troops) with slight exceptions to parade movements. What would Lord Bcfesford or Colonel Baker say to all this wheeling and deploying in the face of-gulis in position. Tliat left out of the' rjuestion, one troop would make a very poor show of, movements requiting at least three or four squadrons' to give them any effect.” I fere Capt W. (whether purposely or not I cannot say) endeavours I to give the public a wrong impression with regard to the movements mentioned in my former letter, for if he or any one interested will take the trouble to look at my original report they will land that I: particularly stated that these ‘‘ pretty and effective movements ” would have added greatly to the effect of the ■Review, 'the word review being emphasised in order to prevent any,possibility of error on this head. As to Lord Berea ford or Colonel Baker’s opinion I might just,as well ask,what Sir Garnet Wolselcy would say to all the wheeling in quarter distance' column and deploying - in the face 'of guns in position that were gone through by the iafaptry at the review. lam aware that I left many movements nmnentionod; but un'der any.cifcunisfances 1 should not have mentioiiecT tire ‘'particularonereferred to • by Capt W. as I wva%' v taught ;: tO coiislclhr it as a. secondary movement in order td'regain the Original: formation - after.ua • sqn adron Bod -exgcu t eiL t|ip moveinent of “ Line to the rear by the wheel about of troops.”,-, I may,have very probably have, as unfortunately. for myselfT have not had the peculiar advantages enjoyed by Capt W. of three years instruction by one. of “ England’s smartest drills”' and {be fifrther one of sevei alycars' under Major Noake, but althogb I have enjoyed the comparatively small-'-advan-tage of having drilled and been drilled in Volunteer Cavalry for over seventeen ygarSjMhe tirst fqur being hard actual;ser--vice in the field, and the. last, four-under immediate inslructioiuand coimnand of an ex-Colpuel of cavalry, whose superior on the parade ground, I have yet to meet, and; therefore,'like Capt W.,“ am scarcely likely to take offence,”&c., &c, As this iast pitH' of Capt W.’s letter, is/simply a personal attack on injmelf, I shall not again reply to any letter of his on this subject,, as I consider, that, as,soon as newspaper correspondence becomes- simply’ a personal quarrel it loses public interest, and there-, fore all right,to-space in a public journal. At the same time if a fair argument of the pros .and, cons of the movement in question is brought forward I shall- Be ■ happy ‘to come forward to the struggle on your giving your opinion (as a foot note to the letter) that further writing on the subject is admissablo. ~ Your War Correspondent.