During the American Civil War [so 1861-1865], while "shoots" were indeed more bloody than baionettes, you used charges and hand-to-hand to break enemy formation and take its position. Shoots were for causing casualties, charge was to take a position from which you could shoot more enemies [or get shot less]
Obviously, charges had a high-rate of failure.
In the better equiped and better trained Europe, Crimea was to my knowledge the last war where head-on charge could so something significant for the course of a battle. In neither the Austro-Prussian war nor the French-Prussian war [not sure for the Danish one] did any infantry or cavalry charge have any success. There was this famous event during the French-Prussian war were the Kaiser watched hopeless charge from the French cavalry [actually trying to gain time, though], cavalry which was anniliated. The Kaiser commented "Ah, les braves gens" [Ah, the brave fellows !].
While WWI cavalry indeed had end to end weapons, like lances, the purpose was not head-on charge but for skirmish when meeting. enemy in reconnoissance. In serious combat they would dismount.
Obviously, charges had a high-rate of failure.
In the better equiped and better trained Europe, Crimea was to my knowledge the last war where head-on charge could so something significant for the course of a battle. In neither the Austro-Prussian war nor the French-Prussian war [not sure for the Danish one] did any infantry or cavalry charge have any success. There was this famous event during the French-Prussian war were the Kaiser watched hopeless charge from the French cavalry [actually trying to gain time, though], cavalry which was anniliated. The Kaiser commented "Ah, les braves gens" [Ah, the brave fellows !].
While WWI cavalry indeed had end to end weapons, like lances, the purpose was not head-on charge but for skirmish when meeting. enemy in reconnoissance. In serious combat they would dismount.