GENERAL MAURICE

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 203, 16 May 1918, Page 5

GENERAL MAURICE

NEW MILITARY CRITIC OF THE "DAILY CHRONICLE"

A PRELIMINARY EXPLANATION (Kec. May 16, 1.50 a.m.) , r . .„ London, May 15. Major-Goncral Maurico (late "High' Military Authority") has accepted the position of military correspondent of the Daily Chronicle." In his first article he says: "1 only did my duty, not ns a disgruntled soldier who had been turned cut of a job—l was about to take up important employment in Trance. I can say without vanity that I had a promising career -before mo. I havo left tho eorvico I love, und 'therefore havo made a very real sacrifice, I hope not in vain. Ido not intond to indulgo in recriminations, and any criticisms 1 may make will be constructive. I. appealed to Parliament to inquire into mv statements. My appeal failed. My case has not been heard. I paid the penalty for a broach of discipline, which, I deeply regret, I felt bound to commit.' Thereis nothing moro to bo said. Any jiowspuper controversy y.pon tho facts of my letter is obviously impossible. I am propared to substantiate theii- correctness before a tribunal nppointwl by P,arliam"nt, I feel that an explanation is jiocessary in regard to two of Mr. Lloyd George's oomments. First, regarding my presence ut Versailles when ihe talcing over of the lino was discussed: I accompanied the British representatives and attended tho first meeting of the Supreme War Council. During subsequent meeting:! I was in the oorridor outsido the Council Chamber, «nd during the iHorvnls between, the meetings was engaged in work in connection with tho (luostions under examination. Therefore my statement that I was at Versailles wae justified.

The second point: Mr. Lloyd George asked why I made no criticisms while in office. Mr. Lloyd George made his speech on April !). The report; that I. was at the House of. Commons that day is incorrect. It was on that day that the enomy's attack in Flanders began, and between April fl and 20, when I handed over my duties to my successor I was much occupied with dutiea, and was part of the time in France. I had not leisure' for more than a glance (it Mr. Lloyd George's speech. I departed from the War Office on leave on April 20, and then for tho first time read the full report of Mr. Lloyd George's speech. While on leave I learned of Mr.' Bonar Law's answers to questions on April 23. 1 ieturned to London on April 29, and saw the ■ Jknford • report of Mr. Bonar Law's replies. Then, andnot till Sheii, I formed the definite opinion that Mr. Bonar Law's replies and Mr. Lloyd Georgo's statements, taken together, put upon (he 6oldi.ers a responsibility which, according to my judgment, ought to have been borne by Ministers. It appeared lo me to be a matter to urgently correct that impression. I wrote' on April 30 to my late chief, Sir Henry Wilson, point ing out the incorrectness of these statements, and awaited a reply until May 6. I could not wait longer, because I had been warned to expect orders to go to Franco on May 10. I did not wish to make euch charges on the v eve of leaving tho country." General Maurice concludes bj; denying tho suggestions of collusion with other soldiers, or with opponents of tho Government in Parliament or the Press. "I acted entirely alone. Nothing was further from my mind than to servo any partisan or political purpose."