From the Sirdar down, contradictions of the charge have deservedly
been slapped in Mr Bennett's face.

But it is almost sheer waste of words to follow and refute line by
line the article "After Omdurman." Other of Mr Bennett's accusations
were: that the 21st Lancers, on the way to the front, robbed
hen-roosts and stricken villagers; that once in Omdurman the Soudanese
troops abandoned discipline, looted, ravished, and murdered the whole
night long; that on land and water our cannon and Maxims were
deliberately turned upon unarmed flying inhabitants, massacring,
without pity, men, women, and children. An these charges had been
true, I should have hastened to denounce the culprits, whoever they
were, in the interests of humanity and country. Happily, Mr Bennett's
tale is utterly without foundation, whatever reflection that casts
upon his condition. The Lancers passed through nothing but deserted
villages, where there were neither natives nor roosts to rob, even had
they been so disposed. As for the Soudanese troops, their discipline
throughout was perfect; there was no looting, no ravishing nor murder
done by them or any other divisions of the soldiery. Nor did our
gunners on shore or afloat ever fire upon unarmed people. Let it be
recalled that those whom Mr Bennett so flippantly accuses are
honourable gentlemen and fellow-countrymen. Three things in this
connection are worthy of special note. When the first dervish attack
upon our zereba was repulsed and Wad Melik's dead, dying and shamming
warriors carpeted the north slopes of Jebel Surgham and the plain in
front. "Cease fire" was sounded. Thereafter the dervishes arose from
the ground in hundreds and thousands and walked off, without awakening
a renewal of our fire from cannon, Maxims, or rifles. At the entry
into Omdurman the artillery and gunboats were ordered to be careful
how they fired, and grave risks were incurred by the Sirdar and staff
in personally counselling to friend and foe a cessation of fighting.

Inaccuracy and sensationalism Mr Bennett is welcome to, and to the
sort of notoriety it has brought him. Cheap maudlin sentiment may
profess a pity for those "dervish homes ruined" by the successes of
British arms. The dervishes in their day had no homes. Nay, they made
honest profession that their mission was to destroy other people's,
and do without carking domesticity, as that detracted from the merit
of preparation for paradise. As I have elsewhere said