CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 November 1915, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

" A COMIOAL SIGHT." . To the Editor. Sir—As :ui ox-Corporal's wife. I feel 1 must answer the paragraph in the 'Sews re "A Comical Sight." Anyone who knows anything of the British Army at all would know that all the "warning" in the worlj 'from members of the Field Battery, etc.. would not deter them from doing their duty. If they are ordered to "form fours" when fetching water they must attend to it, anil perhaps they are more tired than those who warn them. After all, discipline makes the good soldier, in spite of being a target, and it is certainly braver to attend to duty than to run away from it. I presume you have not got the gist of it correctly. "The Comical Sight" is reading of that same tiredness.—l am, etc., INTRA PTC. Eltham, November 8. AND OTHER MATTERS—AS INTRODUCED. To the Editor. Sir.—The story Mr. Wright heard iroiu (he. "returned soldier" (nameless) sounds very plausible to some people, no doubt; but just put it alongside of the following from Sir Francis Treves, Sur-geon-in-Chiof to the King: "As a work producer alcohol is exceedingly extravagant, and, like all other extravagant measures, leads to a physical bankruptcy. It is also curious that troops cannot work or march on alcohol. I was, as you know, with the relief column that moved on to Ladvsmith, and, of course, it was an extremely trying time by reason of the hot weather In that enormous column of 30,000, the first who dropped out were not the tall men, or the short men, or tho big men, or the little meli—they were the drinkers, and they dropped out as clearly as if they had beefi labelled witli a, big letter on their backs." Of course Mr. Wright will say that that was not in the trenches; just as Beresford was not in the trenches. So it comes to this, that rum is only needed in the trenches; the sailor-man does not need it in the "stormy midnight watch;" the "returned officer" does not need.it in Palmerston; and I presume we do not need it here in Taranaki. Though it appears that Mr. Wright has given up defending the ordinary rum ration, and confines his support to the emergency use of the spirits in the trenches, yet it may not be out of place to quote here an article in The British Medical Journal of 1914: "Perhaps the most striking practical demonstration on a large scale of the harm immediately done to armies by a spirit ration was the experience of McClellan's great army on tho banks of the Potomac river in 1802, when, after several weeks of severe hardships in trenches, battles, and exposure to wet, it was determined to issue a spirit ration under the belief that it would, inter alia, help to stop bowel complaints, which were very common. By most of the army it was accepted as a boon, but after one month the ration was withdrawn because drunkenness, dysentery and diarrhcea had increased. Subsequently the officers of the 4th Corps, being ordered to report on sickness in the camps, unanimously stated that "the use of the whisky (the form of spirit used) ration was injurious, and the Principal Medical Officer of General Smith's Division reported not only that the whisky had increased bowel affections, but also "that it was nothing but an unmitigated source of evil."' While waiting for the first name in that long list that includes "every commander" who wants the rum ration, I am very glad, Sir, for your sake, as well as for the sake of Mr. Wright and myself, that your paper, the "Daily News," is so widely read. It is exactly what we want; to appear in a widelyread paper is a great thing, and I am quite sure Mr. Wright will join me in thanking you very sincerely for the privilege of using your columns.—l am, etc. GEO. M. MAUNDER. 9/11/15.