No Money Rewards For War Leaders

Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 274, 19 November 1945, Page 4

No Money Rewards For War Leaders

By CYRANO

THE British Government's decision ■*• not to make money. grants to victorious commanders is a break with custom, but I think it will be approved by most. I don't remember if there was opposition to the grants that were made after the victory of 1918. Probably there was some, but it was not serious. The nation was accustomed to its generals and admirals being rewarded in this way,- and the social atmosphere was different. Some 20 years before that, Kitchener had been voted £30,000 for his conquest, of the Sudan, and Roberts £100,000 for his success in South Africa. From Mr. Churchill's expressed opposition to the Government's decision, it may be deduced that, if he had remained in office, he would have proposed a series of money rewards similar to those bestowed at the end of the first World War. For his part in keeping the bridge. Horatius received as much of the public corn-land "as two strong oxen could plough from morn till night"— probably quite a valuable estate as wealth went in those days. The Rome of Horatius, however, was a republic defended by a citizen army, j The old method of rewarding successful commanders in Britain wasa product of the system on which the Army and society were organised. The ranks fought "in the pale shade of, the aristocracy." A victorious general became a peer, and the peerage had to be well buttressed with property. Outstanding Examples The two outstanding examples of lavish material reward for militai-y services are Marlborough and Wellington. The greatest of English soldiers may not have been as avaricious, and as unscrupulous in his avarice, as some biographers believe, but there is no doubt about his bent. At the height of his career Marlborough rolled in wealth. He held several offices, all well paid, and his wife enjoyed several others. Between them they drew, including the salary paid by the Dutch, over £60,000 a year, and Marlborough received costly presents from foreign governments. Out of these sums, however, he had to entertain, and finance his secret service, in the direction of which he was a master. Above all this, princely grants were made to The gods did not give John Churchill genius and victory and wealth without taking something back. He lost both his sons. The elder died early. The second, Charles, Marquess of Blandford, "beloved and admired," "with the highest prospects of any man at Cambridge," died as a student at 17. Soon afterwards, the father, sick at heart, went to Europe to wrestle with the French and the stupidity of his Dutch allies. The Marlborough name, title and estates have descended through the female line. Grants in Perpetuity One of the grants to Marlborough was £5000 a year from the Post Office, for himself and his heirs forever. This, I believe, was commuted long ago. But we were reminded the other day, and after the Government had announced its decision about rewards to generals, that at least one such grant in perpetuity is still being paid. When Nelson died his brother was given his title, a large lump sum, and £5000 a year forever. Mr. Dalton, Chancellor of the Exchequer, has drawn attention to the fact that since Trafalgar the Nelson family—not, bear in mind, the admiral's descendants—have drawn £700,000 from the country. This is not the first time the matter has been raised, but probably the Labour Government will be more determined to settle it. Wellington got £500,000 for his Peninsula victories, and another £200,000 after Waterloo. A large part of these moneys went into an estate in Hampshire, which Wellington said would have ruined any other man. For some tune he put jack all the income from it into improvements. He was also given Apsley House in London, the tvindows of which a mob was to break. The nation was grateful in death as well as in life, for the Duke's funeral cost £60,000. Wellington College, one of the great public schools of England, was built as a memorial to him by public subscription. In considering these old-time payments it must be borne in mind that money was. worth much more than it is now. Moreover, this generation sees a sharper contrast between the money poured out for generals and the bad treatment of the rank and file.

At the end of World War No. 1 Haig get £100,0(50 and his Army commanders £30,000 each. Allenby received £50,000. Beatty, the commander of the Grand Fleet at the armistice, was given £100,000, but Jellicoe, who had commanded from the beginning till the end of 1916, including Jutland, got only £50,000. This differentiation was open to the criticism that' Jellicoe had shouldered the greater responsibility. Hitherto such grants had been straight-out gifts, but it had been found that' some recipients had handled the money unwisely, so the grants after the 1918 victory were capital, of which only the interest could be touched. All the recipients were, peers. j The Nation is the Army Times have changed, and the Labour Government is a product of that change. There is no disposition to undervalue the services of commanders, but the nation looks at war with.different eyes. In the old days proportionately more attention was focused on the general. The small professional army in which, as a member of a privileged aristocracy, he had risen, was neglected and despised by the nation in peace. In war it brought a glow of patriotism to the civilian's breast, but it was still something apart from his life. The two world wars changed that. The Army was. the nation in arms. .Victory or defeat affected everybody, and was everybody's business. The burial of the Unknown Soldier was a symbol. He represented the mass of common men who fought and won. More than ever before it is realised that responsibility for the outcome of battle and war is spread over all ranks. Class distinctions have grown weaker and sympathy for the under dog stronger. Not the be-medalled commander, beloved of the throne, Riding cock-horse to parade when the bugles are blown, But the lads who carried the kopje and cannot be known. < To these and the "ranker" in ■ all stations of life John Masefield consecrated his poems, and it is highly significant that Field-Marshal Wavell has quoted from this consecration in a study of the soldier's virtues.'. In doing so he speaks for millions of his countrymen. So the new Government takes the view that generals and admirals should* not be singled out for monetary rewards in the spectacular fashion of the past, but should live on the pay and pen-\ sions of their rank.