not so deeply deplored by " society" as it would
be, were it not generally known that she is
engaged .

THE END OF "BLACK SHEEP."

THE ENGLISH AND FRENCH ARMIES.

FOR some months past I have seldom taken
up a newspaper in which the defects of, and the
proposed reforms in, our army have not been
discussed. The overworking of the line regiments,
the difficulty of finding recruits, the expenses
of our military prisons, the casualties
caused by death, desertion, and men taking
their discharges, are all perpetually discussed
in print for the public enlightenment. May I
have my say respecting some of these matters?

You ask what my knowledge is, and where I
have gained it? i served as a commissioned
officer in the English army for fifteen years; I
have been quartered in Europe, Asia, and
Africa; my soldiering experiences were about
equally divided between infantry and cavalry;
and since I left the army i have mixed more
with military men, and have lived more in
military camps and barracks, than ninety-nine
civilians out of a hundred. Nor is it only
English troops that I have seen in the field. In
Algeria and the Crimea I have seen the
bravery of Frenchmen under fire; I have seen
soldiers of the same country face all the
difficulties of campaigning in Syria; and I hare
worn, the fez and the single-breasted frock-coat
uniform of his Imperial Majesty the Sultan.
Thus in three different armies, and with three
different peoples, I have seen what may be
done, what can be done, and what ought to be
done in making brave men into good soldiers,
and I may hold myself entitled —- my name being
known to the conductors of this journal—- to
come forward with my opinion respecting the
military questions which are now agitated in
England.

In the " REPORT or THE RECRUITING
COMMISSION," which terminated its labours some
three months ago, and in the "Appendix " to that
report, there is a great deal ot very valuable
information, showing to what great perfection
the art of " how not to do it " may be carried
in military matters. Take two illustrative facts.
The first is, that we pay nearly half a million
more than the French for our army estimates
and for this sum have an army less than half
the strength of our neighbours—- we being with
out a reserve force, whereas the French have
one hundred and fifty thousand—- and their
cavalry and artillery horses bear the proportion
to ours of a hundred and five to fourteen.* The
second is, that what through desertions, deaths
discharges, soldiers being invalided, and other
causes, we lose and have to renew about an
eighth of our army—- rather more than less—-
every year; in other words, that we expend
every eight years an army of nearly two hundred
thousand men, and have no reserve force from
vhieh to fill up the casualties in our ranks!

* See also No. 241, vol. x., page 352.

Surely this slate of things cannot be rightly
understood by the English public. We pay
fourteen million pounds sterling for an army
which in every respect, save that of personal
courage and obedience to orders, is far behind
lie land forces of every country in Europe, and
which is wasted in bad climates, thrown away
in tropical countries, and generally used up as
if it were worth nothing. Is there no help for
this? Schemes are not wanting to remedy the
evils under which we groan, but which we, bear
with, year after year. The columns of the Times,
Post, Daily News, Telegraph, and Globe bear
witness to this. But in my opinion all these
are more or less useless, if only on the ground
that they neither renew the foundations of the
building, nor remove the old house, but endeavour
to change the walls of the edifice without
taking off the roof. Our army does not
require a piecemeal reorganisation: we have had
enough, and to spare, of that. What it really
wants, and what alone will be of any real service
to it, is an entire change of its whole system:
and before we reform what concerns the rank
and file, we should alter almost all that affects
the officers. It is impossible to have an effective
army unless you secure good officers, and
so long as the present system of appointment
and promotion is maintained, it is impossible to
have good officers. I will illustrate what I
mean in a few words, and by an anecdote for
the truth of which I vouch.

The officers of the English army may be
divided into two great classes, although there
are no doubt several subdivisions. These are
the purchasing and the non-purchasing, the
rich and the poor, the men who have money and
those who have none. It may be said that a
similar distinction might be drawn among the
members of any profession—- the navy, the
law, the church, medicine, even literature.
Granted; but in all these callings poverty is no
hindrance to the advancement of a man clever at
his work, and although a private fortune is
always an exceedingly pleasant adjunct to whatever
an individual may earn or gain, it does not
advance him to the higher posts in his profession.
If the Lords of the Admiralty wish to promote
a lieutenant to commander, or a commander to
post-captain, they do not first inquire what.
amount, of balance there is to his credit at
Coutts's or Drummond's. When a barrister is
called within the bar, or when from the silk
gown he is promoted to the ermine, a want of
coin would not prove an obstacle to his
advancement. The graduate whose papers are
en règle, and whose testimonials are satisfactory,
is not called upon to deposit a sum of
money with the bishop's agents before he can
have holy orders conferred upon him. The
medical man is not obliged to pay several
hundred pounds for his diploma; nor does the editor
of any magazine or newspaper, before he accepts
an article, inquire whether the writer keeps a