DARDANELLES EFFORT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19838, 7 January 1928, Page 12

DARDANELLES EFFORT.

"ARCH ENEMY" OF CAMPAIGN.

LATE FIELD-MARSHAL'S DIARY. [most OCR OWN CORRESPONDENT.] LONDON, Nov. 16. Criticisms of the late Field-Marshal Sir Henry Wilson, whom he designated as the "arch enemy" of the Dardanelles expedition, were made by Sir lan Hamilton in an address to the Royal •'Naval Division Officers' Association. After recalling that in March, 1917, Sir Henry Wilson wrote of the importance of detaching the Turks, then the Bulgarians, then the Austrians, Sir lan continued: "But it was another story when we were still in being. When you went first to try, at imminent danger to your lives, to help him and his com-mander-in-chief by your diversion at Antwerp, ho writes derisively: 'There are Winston's marines, who have given us much amusement. There is that splendid territorial army of ours which Johnnie Hamilton .and Haldane have for years said could put up a superb fight. Then why should Antwerp fall?' "On July 17, 1915, he goes to see Foch; he tolls him the latest Dardanelles news, adding the terrible remark that *a success would be a disaster.' In every way, constantly, he makes it his business to go round and try to ruin us—he, un officer holding a high appointment on the staff of a brother Commander-in-Chief."

Sir lan declared that if the Royal Naval Division had been able to push through the Black Sea to join the Russian armies of the south, Rtissia would have been secured to-day as a people friendly to England. "Tliera was no camaraderie; no shoulder to shoulder work between the British and Russian troops," he said. "Had there been, we should now, to-day, have been doing a gigantic trade with that country."

Sir lan Hamilton writes a letter to the Times to correct any false impression that might have been produced by his speech. "There is no 'attack,' he says, "on the. late Field-Marshal Sir Henry Wilson involved in my having said of him that he was hostile to the Dardanelles idea. He was just as much entitled to that opinion as any other statesman or soldier. Nor was there any attack on him in reminding my audience, by an extract from his diary, of the fact that he had no confidence at that time (1914-15) in troops like the territorials, new armies, or Royal Naval Division. "In pointing out, however, that he, as a staff officer to a brother Commander-in-Chief, should not have worked independently against the Dardanelles enterprise with members of our own Government as well as with officers and members of the French Government, I did criticise his action, because I felt that someone at least should step out and say that in so acting he was setting a bad example to young .officers. "As to my personal feelings, although our former friendship seemed to be entirely broken by the stand I made for voluntary service as against national service, he was of a generous, kindly nature, and h 6 never bore malice. The day after the tragedy in Belgrave Place I spoke of him on a publio occasion in terms which caused me to bo threatened with a like death myself, if J did not 'stand off the grass.' "