Tenth was, in general, a Regiment that was very attached to the wearing of a moustache, and the feelings of the Editor of the Gazette, on hearing the rumour that the standing order to wear a moustache was imminently to be rescinded, are set out in a article that appeared in Volume 25:
Copied from The XRH Gazette No. 25 October 1913. Volume 25
A subject that was causing excitement and agitated controversy in the Home military circles, in July, was the “Army moustache”. Certain London papers predicted its doom, and the paragraph of the King’s Regulation prohibiting the shaving of the upper lip, will shortly be abolished.
The consensus of the doubtfully authoritative opinions of those who rushed into correspondence on the subject was decidedly in favour of its discontinuance. One who is described in the Daily Sketch as a “military officer” declares that “the popularity of the moustache had waned in the last ten years.
Of course the idea of the regulation may have been to save time when the troops were on the march, but I don’t think any officer begrudges the time the shaving takes now. Another idea may have been to add to the importance of young officers, who, if they were clean shaven, looked like boys, and gave the impression that they were not old enough to command the bronzed veterans in their companies.
Certainly the man who is clean shaven looks most business-like, and that is the main thing to aim at”
Col. Robert Spencer Liddell
Can any weaker arguments than those, this “military officer” propounds for the abolition of the Regulations be conceived?
Imagine the economy of time from omitting to shave the upper lip, after attending to the whiskers and beard. Estimate the impression made upon the bronzed veterans by the young officer whose moustache, except in isolated cases, could not have failed to betray his juvenescence.
“Military Officer’s” views of the desirability of business-like appearance are puerile, and unworthy of comment.
Another London paper introduces its article with the prominent headlines:
CLEAN-SHAVEN ARMY OFFICERS AND MEN OBJECT TO WEARING
MILITARY MOUSTACHE
DISLIKED BY WOMEN
Then asks pertinently “Is the military moustache to disappear?
Follows this up by the assertion that “agitation is now being made, by both officers and men in the army for the right to be clean shaven, and the abolition of the paragraph No. 1695 of the King’s Regulations” which is describes as autocratic.
The paper quotes claims to have sent representation to the War Office, where an “Official” informed him—-
Major-General the Hon. Julian Headworth George Byng C.B. M.V.O.
The paper also acknowledges the kindness of Major-Gen. Sir Alfred Turner, who gave a brief history, (unpublished) of the regulations for wearing whiskers, beards and moustaches in the Army. Also the General’s opinion “that there is among officers undoubtedly, a growing feeling against the moustache, which they are enforced to wear. He notices an increasing number of Army men who have deliberately shaved the upper lip in defiance of the regulations. The General stated that whiskers of moderate length means that men shall not have long flowing hair on their face—called, he believed, “Piccadilly Weepers” , but whiskers of the old fashioned “mutton chop design. Until the end of the eighteenth century, said Sir Alfred, officers had to be clean shaven. About 1815 the mutton-chop whiskers, popularised by the Duke of Wellington, was recognised in an Army Order.
The Editor of the paper adds — “women generally prefer the clean-shaven man – or if they confess to a liking at all for a moustache, the latter, it is specified, must be a very small one.
“I do not like moustaches at all;” said a girl of twenty, “I think a man looks much fresher and younger without one.”
Undeniably it is the press annual silly season, when space and time can be devoted to the publication of such utter drivel; it was left to a certain Chaplain, R.N. to attain the climax. He seized upon the rumour, and it is no more than a rumour still, taking no shape in officially inspired paragraph. It is possible, of course, that the W.O. may be considering the cancelation of the regulation, but experience teaches that the W.O. is not unduly precipitate: rash and catastrophic haste has no part in its procedure; many a moustache will be bleached by age while the W.O. is deciding its fate.
Sir Arthur Lawley K.C.S.I. G.C.I.E. K.C.M.G.
The Chaplain, R.N. is eager and impatient. For him the moustache is doomed; the razor waits for it, the lather foams. He mocks the moustache about to perish; he tells its history with contempt. The wearing of it, he says, was an “imitation of foreign adventurers who fought for the British Army in the Napoleonic Wars, and by the middle of the last century, the good old clean cut type of British face was gradually ousted by the alien moustache.”
Is it, he asks, an adornment; is it soldier-like; is it virile? Not at all. The University man, the sportsman is shaving the upper lip. “All that is wanted to make the custom as of yore, the distinguished mark of the Britisher, is its general adoption by Army Officers. If men want to grow hair on the face, why not let it grow as nature intended? A beard is, at any rate, a virile and classical appendage, and frequently aesthetic. If however, a Britisher finds it necessary to his happiness to wear the moustache alone, he might, at any rate, avoid the exotic waxing and twisting of the ends.”
The answers to Chaplain, R.N. are too obvious: they will be apparent to all Gazette readers. All through the ages Chaplain R.N. and the Chaplains who came before him, Chaplains and Bishops, Curates and Patriarchs and Archdeacons have been writing letters to the press, and have been preaching sermons and compiling books, and addressing their diocesan clergy and laity on this same note. Beard or moustache or both, trimmed or untrimmed, it is ever the clergyman who finds fault with the fashion in which the hair is worn upon lip, or chin or cheek.
You can wager that, however careful may be our instructions to the barber, Chaplain R.N. and his brethren will not be satisfied. Chaplain would allow beard to grow untouched by scissors. Once upon a time that advice was followed, and the wearers were described as prelate, as “filthy goats and bristly Saracens.”In the Elizabethan period some shaved the chin, and were asked by a divine of repute “if they would imitate heathen Turks”. No word of Dr Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, can guide our barbering towards orthodoxy, but what can be remembered is, his trim little moustache, curled upwards in a fashion that shows he at least, was not averse to “the exotic waxing and twisting up of the ends.
The Regimental July 1915 By B Richards
What does Chaplain R.N. mean when he talks of “Britisher of yore”? In days of yore were there Britishers? Were the moustached Englishmen on the hill of Hastings, the moustached, bare chinned Crusaders who rode against Saladin’s hosts, the moustached Cavaliers of Prince Rupert – were these alien or lacking in virility?
Soldiers will not be influenced in the least by the foolish discussion, or by the gross misrepresentations which imply that they are dissatisfied by the regulations that secure uniformity in the matter discussed. They will simply continue to reflect with complacency that a moustache was formerly a badge that distinguished them from civilians, who affected it hoping it would give them a soldierly air. They will hope too, that their civil friends will adopt the advice of Chaplain R.N. and so again establish the distinction between the classes, military and civil.
And Gazette readers will recall that Hussars were the first troops in the British Army, who were permitted to wear a moustache alone.
When this was published Major Pillinger was no longer serving with the Tenth, but was on leave in Torquay before setting off to Cairo. However he did continue to offer some script to the Journal ever month and this was one of his first pieces.
Copyright 2019 © Major Pillinger/Richard Pillinger. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission is strictly prohibited. www.sciweb.co.uk
The Secretary of the Admiralty states that information has been received from the Commander-in-Chief at the Cape of Good Hope, dated December 3rd, reporting that the transport Ismore struck on the rocks off Columbine Point, near St Helen’s Bay, distant about 75 miles north of Table Bay, in calm, thick weather. The troops had been landed, also a quantity of baggage, most of the guns, swords, carbines and some ammunition. The men were reported to be comfortable and plenty of food available. The Admiralty was sending HM ships Niobe and Doris, also the transport Columbine, with lighters to assist.
A copy of a telegram has been received from the principal transport officer at Cape Town, dated the 4th inst., reporting that the transport Ismore (no 52.)broke up on Sunday night. Her stern is out of water and her bows gone. All hands and 20 horses were saved and will probably entrain to Malmesbury. The Ismore, which went ashore in Helen’s Bay on Sunday morning is the second transport that has come to grief on the voyage to the Cape the Persia having been disabled in a storm at St Vincent while conveying the C Squadron of Dragoons and some men of the Inniskillings on November 8th. In the latter case all the troops and horses were successfully transferred to the transport Goth, but in the case of the Ismore a large number of the horses were lost. She had on board the 63rd Field Battery, Royal Artillery from Bristol, “A” Squadron of the Tenth Hussars and a troop of “B” Squadron of the Tenth Hussars from Aldershot, and No. 9 Company (Bearer) Royal Army Medical Corp from Colchester. The military details would necessarily have with them a considerable number of horses, for the mounted troops on board number 460. As only 20 horses were reported saved, it is feared that the loss of animals is serious, inasmuch as they would not be3 of the chartered class, but selected trained chargers and gun-teams. The value placed upon such animals by military authorities is very considerable, and the loss will be much keenly felt by reason by the dearth of suitable and reliable mounts and gun-teams at the front.
It is too be hoped that the troops will be able to save the six field pieces, if not the wagons and other pieces of the Field 63rd Battery, but nothing is said as to this being effected.
The presence of warships at the scene of the wreck may have been valuable in this respect, assuming that the position of the wreck and weather permitted the sufficiently near approach of the working parties who would have the advantage of the necessary appliances for transferring the guns. The time at the disposal of those on the spot between the hours of the vessel sinking and breaking up to save much other than themselves would seem to have been very limited, and therefore it cannot be hoped that any considerable proportion of the vessel’s war stores can have been saved. It is known that with the troops were landed some guns, swords, carbines etc. and ammunition; but the bulk of Ismore’s cargo cannot have been landed in the time available. It will be remembered that the Ismore endeavoured to leave England in a gale, and after futile attempts took shelter in Moelfre Bay on the Anglesey coast until November 8th, when she put to sea four days late.
The Ismore had on board 400 rank and file of various sections. The 63rd Field Battery consisted of six officers, 170 men and 140 horses, with six 15 pounder guns 11 four-wheeled military vehicles, ambulance wagons, and stores. The Bearer Company of the Royal Army Medical Corps on board consisted of one officer and 52 men, with ambulance wagons and fittings. The A squadron and troop of B squadron of the Tenth Hussars on board numbered about 180 officers and men. There were altogether about 250 horses shipped, together with numerous wagons and vehicles. Major W Paget is the officer commanding the Field battery , and Major Alexander the Hussars.
The Press Association added that 230 valuable horses have been lost to the British cavalry and artillery proceeding to the front by the wreck of the Ismore. It is scarcely possible that the numerous ambulance wagons and other vehicles referred to in the above telegram can have been saved owing to the difficulties of transfer, and consequently one of the most important non-combative branches of the military service has lost probably their conveyance and medical equipment and supplies.
From the Glasgow Herald 3rd December 1889
By kind Permission of the British Library Board.