THE H.G. GENERAL

Grey River Argus, 21 May 1943, Page 3

THE H.G. GENERAL

Lieut.-Gen. Sir Arthur Smith, spoke recently about the future of the Home Guard. When the war was ended, he said, the influence and example of the Home Guard would be needed to keep the country disciplined and steady. And more in the same strain.

Later' Grigg was questioned about the speech by' the Home Guard General. Grigg said that “an authoritative” statement will be made on the subject. At the same time a War Office statement was issued to the effect that the General was speaking in his personal capacity and not for the Government.

We really wonder whether the public and Parliament will accept this unconvincing explanation. What an outcry there would have been it a Sergeant had arrived on the parade ground with a soap-box and harangued the men on the need for red revolution? Yet. what the General did was ho less outrageous, seen as a breach of military discipline.

Even more serious must have been the effect on thousands of Home Guards who enrolled to defeat Nazi invasion and who are told now that they must prepare to turn their weapons against fellow workers. Alarm and despondency would be a mild description.

Sir Arthur Smith is not an irresponsible officer. He was Chief oi the General Staff in the Middle East until 1940. Apparently he thinks it natural that a man in his position should hold views such as he expressed. It ought to be equally natural that an embattled democracy should view not only the indiscretion but also the reactionary political trend betrayed by the General with utter ruthlessness. The London Home Guard deserve a more representative commander. It must be Parliament’s job to insist that they get it. —Tribune.