FRENCH AND GERMAN ARMIES

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 322, 13 January 1909, Page 4

FRENCH AND GERMAN ARMIES

AX KXtiLISi ij| .v.V'N C'HITJCISAIS.

A free criticism „f the French anil German armies as tiiey were observer! (luring liic recent manoeuvres, appears ill the United Service Magazine from the pen of Mr Howard Hensnian. On the whole, for efficiency on modern lines it awards the palm to the French. "The French General Staff," says the writer, •' may not be so highly trained as tli.it of Germany—though this a subject that invites debate—but the men it controls are. more intelligent, and consequently better soldiers." It sounds strange after what was written by German critics of British troops in South Africa, but Mr Hensnian remarks:—

"Because of the brilliant successes of German arms in the three eamjwigiis between 18l>4 and 1871, the Germany military leaders seem to think that th» same methods would prevail to-dav against a determined toe armed with quiek-liring guns and magazine' lilies. Again and again, during the manoeuvres dense masses of infantry were moved forward without tiny regard for the pounding they were receiving from both artillery and entrenched infantry, and with a supreme disregard for tile fact that they were often being assailed oil both flanks and their front at once. Re-' lentlesslv the leaders hurled the regiments and the brigades forward, caring nothing for the fire of the opposing guns! Had these being shotted the men would have been mowed down jik ( > field of com ; but they were secure in the knowledge that there were almost unlimited reserves at their disposal to make good all losses, ajid, as it was hoped, eventually win the day by tiring down their opponents."

I If anything like it had taken place in English manoeuvres, says Mr Hensnian. the umpires would liave quickly intervened. Things are described as being very different in the French army " Here all the ranks displayed on every occasion an almost instinctive knowledge of the great value of cover,! and brigadiers and divisional generals kept their men hidden very effectively until the last moment, when they were suddenly launched for a very rapid jjaali, in greatly extended order, over the open ground. The contrast between the methods employed by the two armies was however, most .marked, aud so far .is conducting an attack upon an entrenchI ed position is concerned, the advantage lies undqubtedly with the French."

■ In the French army, it is stated, much better care is taken of the men, this 1 probably being due to the enhanced' value of an army drawn from a smaller population. The French boots are much better than the German. French "casualties *' from injured feet from marching were only 2 per cent, of the entire infantry, while in Germany they were over 20 per cent, though they marched shorter distances. Mr Hensman also remarks upon the relations of officers and men in the two countries. In Germany, he says, the old iron discipline is maintained, to the detriment, as some foreign observers thought, of military efficiency. In the French Army, there is a tendency to loosen the bonds of discipline, and certainly there is a familiarity between officers and men that is not seen in the [British Army, much less that of Germany. Whether this is a bad or a good thing is debatable, but the general im- ! pression is that it has made for a greater efficiency in the Held, with more intel- , ligence and flexibility, whereas Germany, adds Mr Ifensman. still dings to the system of Rook and Moltke.