Cavalry.
Though our cavalry was numerous, its work hardly came up to our expectations, but where it was properly commanded it did well enough. In my opinion, the main reform that is necessary in the cavalry is to improve their training. Till it is educated to feel that it should fight as obstinately as infantry, the money expended on our mounted Arm will be thrown away. If infantry can still continue fighting after losing 50 per cent. of their strength, cavalry should be able to do the same. In action we nursed the cavalry too much; out of action we did not take sufficient care of it. Though they had not lost a man, whole regiments were moved to the rear as soon as the first shrapnel began bursting near them. The four regiments of cavalry—two dragoon and two Cossack—on whom fell the most difficult but the most honourable duty of obtaining information and opposing the leading units of Nogi’s enveloping forces at the battle of Mukden, lost in killed and wounded:
| Men. | |||||
| February 25 | … | … | … | … | 2 |
| March 2 | … | … | … | … | 1 |
| March 4 | … | … | … | … | 1 |
| March 5 | … | … | … | … | 7 |
| March 6 | … | … | … | … | 2 |
| March 7 | … | … | … | … | 6 |
| March 8 | … | … | … | … | 1 |
| March 9 | … | … | … | … | 1 |
| March 10 | … | … | … | … | 1 |
| Total | … | … | … | 22 |
Which works out at less than one man per squadron and sotnia. The casualties in almost every company of infantry were more than in these twenty-four squadrons and sotnias. It is quite plain that these units did not fight, but merely avoided the enemy; and it is equally plain that, by avoiding battle, the cavalry neither checked the enemy’s movement nor got any information about him. The material of which our cavalry was composed was excellent, but everything depended on those in command. In the battle of Te-li-ssu the infantry of the 1st Siberian Corps lost 2,500 men; the Primorsk Dragoon Regiment, belonging to the same corps, lost one!
But I repeat that where their leaders meant fighting the cavalry did their duty and suffered heavily. Take, for example, the Trans-Baikal Cossacks, which did so well under Mischenko, and the Caucasian Brigade. The Siberian Cossacks, under Samsonoff, fought at Liao-yang and the Yen-tai Mines with greater bravery than was displayed by some of Orloff’s infantry, while the independent sotnias of the Don and Orenburg Voiskos, and the dragoons under Stakhovitch, were no whit behind them. Indeed, the men of the Primorsk Dragoon Regiment were good enough; it was the officers who failed in not getting the best out of them. The independent units of all the Cossacks did well, but it was out of the question to expect martial ardour or a keen desire to perform feats of gallantry in old men such as formed the 3rd Category Cossack regiments. But even these 3rd Category regiments could do good work when skilfully handled. The Cossack horses generally, and the Trans-Baikal horses in particular, were too small; while those of the Don regiments were sturdy, but rather soft. The Trans-Baikal Cossacks on their shaggy little ponies reminded one more of mounted infantry than cavalry. On the whole, however, our cavalry worked far better than in the Russo-Turkish War under Generals Kuiloff and Loshkareff at Plevna. The great difficulty now is to find and train cavalry leaders; in Manchuria, according to most accounts, the juniors were good, the field officers moderate, and the general officers, with few exceptions, bad.
The personality of the officer in command of a regiment of cavalry is a very important factor, as his merits and weak points are very quickly known, and as soon as a man in such a post shows himself unsuitable he should be removed. (This also applies to the general officers.) But I rarely found a divisional or corps commander who would report on the unsuitability of senior commanders under them; they even concealed cases of cowardice. It was only at the conclusion of hostilities that it transpired that several had not only shown a lack of keenness, but even of personal courage. Some of the regimental commanders were very old; at fifty-five a man is too old for the command of a regiment. As in the infantry, the post of cavalry brigadier should be improved, and made a more important appointment. To it should be given the executive and administrative powers now wielded by divisional generals.
Three brigades should be formed into a division, the divisional general being given the powers of an army corps commander. There is no necessity for a higher organization. To the division of three brigades should be allotted a twelve-gun battery of horse artillery (three companies of four guns each). To every three-division army corps should be added one cavalry or Cossack brigade. One of the regiments of this brigade should act as divisional cavalry, two squadrons or sotnias with each division. If it is thought desirable that commanders of infantry divisions become acquainted with cavalry in peace-time, then two squadrons should be stationed in the area of the divisions under them.