The Press THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 1940. Mr Hore-Belisha's Resignation

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22921, 18 January 1940, Page 6

The Press THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 1940. Mr Hore-Belisha's Resignation

The statements in the House of Commons on

Tuesday by Mr Hore-Belisha and Mr Chamberlain and the debate which followed have

served merely to deepen the mystery which surrounds the resignation of Mr Hore-Belisha

from the position of Secretary of State for War. Mr Hore-Belisha, indeed, added no

facts to those which were contained in his

letter of resignation. Mr Chamberlain tedi-

ously and tantalisingly enumerated a number

of reasons which might have been, but were

not, responsible for the change at the War Office. Mr Hore-Belisha had not resigned be-

cause of a disagreement over policy, or be-

cause he was in conflict with his colleagues in

the Cabinet, or because he did not get on well

with the Army Council, or because "certain

"high officers" wanted to get rid of him, or because the new system of army promotion was causing dissatisfaction. He was, it would appear, a model colleague and Minister—except that it was necessary to get rid of him. Mr Chamberlain would have avoided this curious contradiction if, having made up his mind not to tell the public why Mr Hore-Belisha resigned, he had said so plainly instead of wrapping up his decision in a'succession of baffling sentences. As it is, he has merely stimulated public curiosity and uneasiness; and it is' likely that attention will be concentrated on two passages in the debate. One is the passage in which Mr Hore-Belisha heavily underlined his belief in'the need for a thoroughly democratic organisation of the army in order that it might be " a part of the nation and not apart "from the nation" and said that "the consid- ** erations which had persuaded the Prime "Minister to make a change would not allow " his energetic discharge " of the other position offered to him in the Ministry. The other passage is that in which Mr Chamberlain said that the difficulties which made Mr Hore-Bel-isha's resignation desirable arose out of his own good qualities. There is here at least a suggestion that Mr Hore-Belisha desired an extension of democratic reforms' in the army and possibly a more democratic organisation of the war effort generally and was opposed by the Prime Minister. If this is the truth, it is a profoundly disturbing truth; for in some partments at any rate the tendency to give highly-paid and responsible positions to retired generals and admirals and titled nobodies has been too pronounced to be healthy. If, on the other hand, the suggestion is unfounded, Mr Chamberlain cannot be surprised that the public should have drawn wrong inferences. The debate in the House of Commons was the occasion. for further tributes to Mr HoreBelisha's achievements and outstanding ability; but their effect must be to underline the question why it has not been possible to keep him in a War Cabinet which, for a War Cabinet, contains too many mediocrities. If what Mr Chamberlain and others said about the retiring Minister was said in. all sincerity, then the reasons whieh make it impossible for him to accept another portfolio are not reasons which ought' to have any weight.