EVOLUTION OF WARFARE

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 299, 9 March 1928, Page 1

EVOLUTION OF WARFARE

Britain’s Mechanical Army SMALL, EFFICIENT, CHEAP FORCE By Cable.—Press Association. — Copyright. Received 12.30 p.m. LONDON, Thursday. IN the House of Commons the Secretary of War, Sir L. Worthington-Evans, introducing the Army Estimates of £41,050,000, compared with £41,565,000 last year, said that the actual saving to taxpayers was over £1,000,000 because the War Office was receiving £500,000 less than last year from the Exchequer for the Rhine Army, while £200,000 in respect to the Middle East had fallen to the army instead, of to the Colonial Office vote.

fjpHE time had come, he said, to state the results of experiments in the mechanisation of the army. Additional mobility and carrying-power of mechanical vehicles, together with the striking force of tanks, was creating a revolution in the application of the principles of warfare, just as the motor-car transformed the business and social life of the nation. Last year’s manoeuvres, with complete mechanised formations, exceeded expectations, continued the Minister. It was too early to say anything positive about the outcome. Possibly ultimately a few soldiers, in actual warfare, would march great distances and a battle might be carried on in the air or by motor vehicles. The whole organisation of military divisions, with the proportions of cavalry, artillery and infantry, might eventually be replaced by smaller groups of men with various mechanical vehicles and tanks. Meanwhile they had to maintain forces known to be valuable. Experiments with mechanisations were continuing and existing formations were being gradually based on increased mobility, and the firepower provided by motor vehicles. Many oritics -accused him of weakness and wastefulness, because he did not disband immediately all cavalry. Though cavalry on the Western Front in the wartime was overshadowed by the more happenings, the experience in Palestine showed that in certain countries cavairy was still effective and necessary. He did not propose immediately to dispense with more mounted units, but two cavalry regiments would exchange horses for armoured cars. Heavy and medium artillery was being

mechanised and the rest of the field artillery was still horse-drawn. It was intended to convert the latter as soon as funds were available. The estimates did not provide for the force in China. Mr. YVorthington-Evans said that the mechanised squadron at present consisted of six-wheeler lorries carrying eight machine-guns in peace time and 16 in war time. The six-wheelers also carry first-line transport. He hoped in future to substitute light armoured vehicles for six-wheeler lorries. He added that the Air Minister would explain the situation in Iran Mr. J. I. Lawson, Labour, said that compared with those of other nations the Army estimates were small, but. they had so much they needed in the years after the Great YY’ar. Labour would support the vote because it thought the Army ought to be efficient in its purpose. The gravest revelation v/as that only one-third of the men offering as recruits were found to be physically fit. Mr. J. YVheatley, Labour, said that if they could have a demonstration on the floor of the House of a man being bayoneted there would be less enthusiasm for armaments. Was it all through the fear of Russia, the only country leading us in real disarmament ? Mr. A. Duff Cooper, replying to the debate, said that Mr. YVheatley’s utterance was irrelevant, and out of place. Russia’s disarmament proposals were only intended to make i he League of Nations look ridiculous. Everyone wanted peace and disarmament, but no peace advocate believed I complete disarmament was an ideal ' within reach. In the meantime the i Government’s policy was to make the : Army as small, efficient and cheap as ' possible.—A. and N.Z.