MR LLOYD GEORGE SCORES.

Otago Witness, Issue 3348, 15 May 1918, Page 19

MR LLOYD GEORGE SCORES.

GENERAL MAURICE'S CHARGES. MINISTERIAL VERACITY IMPUGNED. A REGRETTABLE INCIDENT. THE TABLES TURNED. (By Cable.) THE TEXT OF THE LETTTR. Major-general Maurice, late Director of Military Operations, Imperial General Staff, has written an astonishing letter to the Daily Chronicle accusing Messrs Lloyd George and Bonar Law of making misleading statements in the House of Commons regarding the extension of the -British front in France, and the number of white divisions in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Palestine. The letter has created a sensation.

Major-general Maurice, in his letter, says: "Several recent • Ministerial answers ,to questions in the House of Commons contain misstatements giving a totally misleading impression of what really occurred. Firstly, Mr Bonar Law on April 23 said that the extension of the British front in France was not dealt with by the Versailles Supreme War Council. This is untrue. I was at Versailles when the Supreme War Council decided that matter. Next, Mr Lloyd George on April 9 said that, notwithstanding our heavy casualties in 1917, our army in France was considerably stronger on January 1, 1918, than in January, 1917. That.implies that Sir D. Eaig's fighting strength on the eve of the great battle which "began on March 21, 1918, was not diminished. This is not correct. Again, Mr Lloyd George said there was only one white infantry division in Mesopotamia and there were only three white divisions in Palestine and Egypt. This is not correct." General Maurice adds: "This letter is not the result of a military conspiracy. I am as sincere a democrat as the Prime Minister, and the last thing I desire to see is the Government in the hands of soldiers. My reason for taking the grave step of writing this letter is that the statements quoted are known to a large number of soldiers to be incorrect, and thisi. knowledge is breeding such disgust with the Government as can only end in impairing the splendid morale gi our troops, just when everything should be done to raise it. Therefore I have decided, fully realising the consequences to myself, that my duty as a citizen overrides my duty' as a soldier, and I ask you to publish this letter in the hope that Parliament may order ih investigation of these statements." In the House of Commons Mr Bonar Law said two judges would be asked to report 'on General Maurice's letter as quickly as possible, but disciplinary proceedings would not await the judges' finding. PRESS COMMENTS. The Daily News and Morning Post also publish General Maurice's letter. The Morning Post says : "General Gough (commanding on the St. Quentin sector on March 21) has been made Lloyd George's scapegoat. The Prime Minister and Mr Bonar Law have made a series of statements well calculated to shield politicians at soldiers' expense. We have already pointed out at home that these statements were out of all accord with credibility. It is imposible to believe that Sir William Robertson and Sir D. Haig approved of the extension of our line with diminishing forces in the face of growing enemy forces. As General Gough is unable to defend himself, the politicians are able to indulge to the full their fine talent for shifting the blame. Fortunately, General Maurice felt impelled to bear witness for the defence. Parliament has a right to know the truth and the army has a right to justice."

The Daily Chronicle fiays editorially: " It is impossible to overstate the gravity 01. General Maurice's letter. • As Director of Military Operations he.had an unsurpassed first-hand \ knowledge of the facts and figures relating to the forces in the field. General Maurice's step is a very serious one for himself, and he is obviously acting frgai a high sense of duty. The Ministers concerned stand charged by a responsible official witness with misleading Parliament and the nation. The alleged misstatements look the Worse because they had the effect of diverting blame from the Ministers to soldiers whom they employed. Moreover, there are grave questions of policy. If the War Cabinet left Sir D. TJaig, "when the German menace was piling itself up against him month after month, with fewer troops than in 1917, the country would not view Cabinet's responsibility leniently. If the two Ministers have, as well they may, a good and conclusive answer, let tnemmake it without delay." Other leading papers commented on the letter by General Maurice, declaring that the charges made must be met. Paris papers regarded the charges as an intrigue arising out of the appointment of General Foch to the command of the Allied forces, and it was pointed out that it was not for an officer to place his duty as a citizen before his duty as a soldier.

American newspapers commented at length on the matter, mostly supporting Mr Irloycl George.

THE CHALLENGED STATEMENTS. It is pointed out that in the House of Commons on April 23 Mr Lambert asked if the Government could explain the failure of the Fifth Army, and whether taking over that portion of the line was contrary to the Judgment of Sir William Robertson and Sir D. Haig?

Mr Bonar Law said there was not the smallest justification for the suggestion that that portion of the line was taken over contrary to the judgment of Sir William Robertson and Sir D. Haig. When Mr Lambert reiterated his question, Mr Bonar Law said the arrangement was a military arrangement between the British and French military authorities. Colonel Burn asked whether Sir D. Haig did not protest aaginst taking over the extra line from the French owing to the few divisions at his disposal? Mr Bonar Law replied: To the best of my knowledge there is not the smallest truth in the suggestion. Naturally thpre have been differences of opinion regarding the extent of the line taken over, but the matter has been left to the military authorities. This particular matter was not dealt with at all by the Versailles War Council. THE ATTENTION OF PARLIAMENT. AN INQUIRY PROMISED. In the House of Commons Mr Asquith drew attention""to General Maurice's letter, and asked what steps the Government proposed to take to enable the House to examine the allegations. Mr Bonar Law replied that the letter raised two questions: firstly" military discipline ; secondly, the security of Ministerial statements. The Army Council was dealing with the first. As regarded the second question, although obviously the Government could not be carried on if inquiry into the conduct of Ministers were considered necessary whenever they were challenged by a servant of the Government who had occupied a position of the highest confidence, but this matter affected the honour of a Minister, and itwas proposed to ask two judges to act on a Court of Honour to inquire into the alleged misstatements of Ministers. Mr Lambert suggested that, as the question affected the House of Commons, the Government should substitute for two judges three distinguished members of the House of Commons or a select committee of the House

Mr Bonar Law replied that the Government was of opinion that the suggested court was the-best method of doing what they considered necessary to satisfy the House that they had, unwittingly, made misleading statements. In order to examine the question, most secret documents must be examined. Obviously it would be very difficult and unsuitable to appoint a select committee.

Mr Asquith asked: Is it pi'oposed to introduce a Bill enabling two jifdges to take evidence,.on oath?

Mr Bonar Law replied that that was not thought necessary. He was sure everyone involved would be glad to place his information at the disposal of the judges., If the judges were not given anything they wanted they would certainly inform the Government. Mr Bonar Law suggested that perhaps Mr Asquith would think it better to have discussion after the report of the judges.—(Cries of "No.")

Mr Pringle asked: Will the disciplinary measures against General Maurice be sus-. pended pending the finding of the court? Mr Bonar Law: No. Even if every statement were true, discipline in the army would be impossible if such letters were permitted to be published. Answering further questions, Mr Bonar Law said: Does Mr Asquith think the Government ought not to proceed with setting up a court until after discussion in the Commons? , Mr Asquith replied : Certainly. Mr Asquith notified that he would move for a select committee of the House instead of two judges to inquire into General Maurice's charges. THE TALK OF THE LOBBIES. -General Maurice's letter is the talk of the lobbies. It is regarded as giving the lie direct to Mr Lloyd George's statements. General Maurice retired from his position in the War Office a fortnight ago under circumstances veiled with mystery. It is understood that Sir Henry Wilson (Chief of the Staff) suggested the .change. Sir William Robertson brought General Maurice from. France in 1915 with .General Whigham, who returned to his command in France. They have been amongst the leaders in the fight between the old military clique and Mr Lloyd George. They V.'Gi?e closely identfied with Marshal Haig and Generals Robertson and Gough... The Unionist War Committee discussed the'General Maurice affair, and decided to support the Government in any division. It is understood that the Liberal War Committee proposes to adopt the same course. The Labour party will await the trend of events as revealed by the debate. It is understood that Mr Lloyd George will make a comprehensive statement replying seriatim to all General Maurice's points, and that Mr Bonar Law apd Sir E. Carson will speak later in the debate. The Government has definitely abandoned its proposal tribunal of two judges shall investigate the charges. Mr Asquith has denied that he has any intention of moving a vote 'of censure on the Government.

Brigadier-general Sir Henry Page Croft, on behalf of the National party, is proposing an amendment to Mr Asquith's motion, whereby two naval and military experts will be added to the War Cabinet to ensure a more effective prosecution of the war. MR ASQUITH'S MOTION. THE PRIME MINISTER'S REPLY. THE MOTION DEFEATED. Mr Asquith, on rising to move the motion of which he had given notice, disclaimed any intention to embarrass the Government. He said there had been much misconception regarding his motion for a select committee. Pie was strongly of opinion that it was not Parliament's business in war time to be constantly inquiring into the conduct of successive

phases of tho war; still Jess to be occupying time in investigating the truth or falsehood of statements by ill-informed persons. Mis motion had been absurdly described as a vote of censure. lie had no such intention. Mr Asquith was warmly applauded on remarking that since he had left office he had done his utmost to assist the Government without /withholding legitimate helpful criticism. Uncharitable people suspected him of wanting to return to power. If ho wanted the House to censure the Government he would do so directly and unequivocally. If the Government had a good case it would emerge with enhanced authority. When ho gave his notice of motion he honestly thought the Government would accept it. Mr Asquith, proceeding to deal with General Maurice's letter, said it was a unique incident in the history of the war. General Maurice was a distinguished soldier who explicitly impugned the accuracy of Ministers' statements, though he was aware that such a serious breach of regulations must jeopardise his future. Mr Asquith denied the allegations that he or his colleagues were privy to the publication of the letter. The Government on Tuesday admitted that an inquiry ought to be made, but it must be secret. He asked if the Government still believed that secret documents could not be disclosed to a select committee of the House of Commons. He assumed that the Government desired inquiry; the only question was of what kind. Mr Asquith still considered that two judges would be an impotent tribunal unless they were specially empowered by Statute. A small HcJuse of Commons committee of five would be proper and more authoritative, and would command the country's respect. Mr Asquith asked: What is the alternative? An interjection: Get on with the war.— (Cheers.) j Mr Asquith replied that misconceptions must be cleared first. Any Ministerial statement would be merely ex parte. Mr Bonar Law remarked that they could not find an. unprejudiced select committee.

Mr Asquith, amid loud cheers, deprecated aspersion upon the House's traditions, and concluded by saying: " I leave it there."

Mr Lloyd George followed. He declared that the demand for a select committee was without parallel. Never before had the House been asked to inquire into the truth or falsity of Ministers' statements. General Maurice had. access to all official information while in office, and was the authority in figures. General Maurice also had access to Ministers, and attended the Cabinet the day after he (Mr Lloyd George) delivered his speech. He did not call attention to the inaccuracy of any statement, though he was daily in contact with him (Mr Lloyd George). , _' _ Mr Lloyd George continued: If the importance of the figures justified General Maurice in breaking the King's regulations, his duty was to inform the Cabinet at the time. He (Mr Lloyd George) would give the source of his information and ask the House to give judgment that day. The Government was anxious to submit the matter to an impartial tribunal. Secrecy was essential, because the interests of a certain Ally were involved. A judicial tribunal was preferable, because passions had been aroused. It was evident from the anti-Government press that no decision of any tribunal would be accepted, so the Government decided to give the facts and let the public judge. Mr Lloyd George said that official records confirmed his statement that the fighting strength of the British army in January, 1918, exceeded that of January, 1.917. His figures thereanent had been given him by General Maurice's department and were initialled by General Maurice's deputy. The figures regarding the allied superiority on the west front over the enemy CAME FROM GENERAL MAURICE, and the statements regarding the British strength were submitted to General Maurice before he (Mr Lloyd George) made them. " General Maurice informed the Cabinet Secretary that he had no remarks to make upon them. The extension of General Cough's, front was not discussed at the Versailles War Council, but it was a dfitsaad for a further extension thjtt was discussed. The former extension, to which General Maurice alluded," was carried out before the Council met, and Sir Douglas Haig and General Petain bad agreed thereon. Not a yard of front was taken over as the result of the Versailles Conference. The real point is : Was General Cough's front extended against the objections of Sir W. Robertson and Sir D. Haig? There was

OF TRUTH in the allegation. Neither Sir D. Haig nor the Cabinet desired it; but the pressure from the French army was enormous. He did not suggest that the French acted unfairly. There had been some ferment in France regarding the relative lengths of the French and British lines. General Robertson drew up a minute stating that the extension ought to be accepted in principle, but the Commander-in-Chief should select a date. The Cabinet adopted the minute. M. Clemenceau later suggested that the Versailles Council should examine the question. The Cabinet only suggested that the General Staff should prepare a case fOr the Versailles Council, and the military representatives suggested a compromise for discussion. Sir D. Haig and General Petain agreed on the extension. At one time Sir D. Haig believed the extension had been decided upon fore he agreed ; but the matter was soon explained. That was the sole basis for the many rumours which had been afloat. The Cabinet fully approved of Sir D. Haig's decision to" extend the line. If the motion were carried Mr Asquith would again bo responsible for conducting the war.

Tho Prime Minister then proceeded to censxire General Maurice's breach of discipline. He (Mr LJoyd George) had that day received protests from Australian sol-

diers against General Maurice's evil example. . The. Prime Minister concluded by declaring that these controversies were distracting and paralysing, "The Germans," he said, " are now silently preparing the biggest blow of the war. The action is shrouded in mystery. Our fate during the next few weeks will be in the balance." He appealed to the House to set an example to the country in presenting a united front to the enemy. Speaking with deep emotion, the Prime Minister begged and implored that there be an. end ..to this sniping down. —(Prolonged cheering.) Sir E. Carson said he thought that the question to be decided was whether the tribunal of inquiry should be two judges or a select committee of Parliament. He deprecated either, but preferred the latter. He asked the House to consider whether it was doing a service to tho country or to the Entente by continuing the debate. " Were we to solemnly summon our generals to give evidence against Ministers, and vice versa?" He appealed to Mr Asquith not to proceed further with his motion. Mr Asquith's motion was defeated by 293 votes against to 106 for the motion. Ninety-eight Liberals and seven Labourites supported Mr Asquith, including Messrs M'Kenna, Runciman, Samuel, and Burns, Sir A. Spicer, Messrs Ramsay MacDonald, and Snowden. Many Liberals supported Mr Lloyd George. PRESS CHORUS OF PRAISE. The papers are in a chorus of praise over Mr Lloyd George converting an attack based on Maurice's letter into what one Ministerial organ describes as " the most futile of fiascoes." The papers declare that Mr Asquith was out-generalled and out-fonght. The Daily News says: Yesterday's melodrama does not affect General Maurice's charges. Mr Lloyd George has burked inquiry, but the public will not waste time over his facts, as they are facts of his choosing.

I The Express and Daily Telegraph eni tirely approve of Mr Lloyd "" George's | answer, and consider his vindication of the Government complete. The Morning Post says the result of the debate shows how lightly Parliament regards its re-* J sponsibilities. The Times, in a leading article, says : The conviction is gradually strengthening in the public mind that the issues at stake j in the Maurice affair go far beyond per- | sonalities. Mr Lloyd George's disclosures enabled us to trace a campaign of obstruction, thwarting every stage towards ! perfect allied unity. The nation is i aroused now and detei*mined to end the ' intolerable mischief. I The New York Times, commenting upon i the defeat of Mr Asquith's motion, says | there is a strong feeling of relief that a I change of Government in Britain lias been j averted. The overthrow of Mr Lloyd I George at this time would have caused i dismay here. All Britain's energies are ', needed for the Flanders battle, j The New York World says that, although the Lloyd George Government lias received a vote of contidence, the atmosphere is not cleared. The grave issue is the hostility existing between the Government and the High Command in the

army. The majority of the New York evening newspapers agree that Mr Lloyd. George's address annihilated General Maurice. The Evening Post says : The Prime Minister gave •a masterly exhibition of adroitness. He skated over thin ice, avoided really fundamental questions, and did not answer the chargo that the British armies on the west front had been unduly weakened just before the offensive. ATTITUDE OF MUNITION WORKERS. Many members of the Commons were impressed by a resolution telegraphed to Mr Lloyd George from a public meeting at Woolwich Arsenal, the workers •saying : "The Germans want you to go, and the pacifists want you to go, but we, the ■workers, don't want you to go. Your

enemies are our enemies. Damn them all. God save England." The following cable was sent from Wei lington, New Zealand, to the British Prime Minister, by the local Patriotic Society: —-"We strongly support every word of the- message sent to you by the Woolwich workers." GENERAL MAURICE RETIRED.

The Press Bureau states that the Army Council considered General Maurice's explanations, and decided that he be placed forthwith on retired pay. LORD CUEZON'S OPINION. Lord Curzon, addressing the Primrose League, said Mr Lloyd George was regarded as a symbol of the inexhaustible spirit and resolve of the British Empire. Had he fallen flags would have waved at Berlin. The country was sick of unpatriotic attacks on the Government under cover of eminent soldiers and sailors. The moment the country allowed military administration to assume the upper hand it would be on the path to disaster. Referring to the military situation, Lord Curzon declared that it was grave. Bravo soldiers might have to give ground, but the unity of command was increasing. The only thing we could not afford to lose was the war; the only thing worth prosecuting was the war.