THE CAMBRAI REVERSE.

Colonist, Volume LX, Issue 14620, 26 January 1918, Page 5

THE CAMBRAI REVERSE.

DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF

COMMONS.

GOVERNMENT STATEMENT DE-

MANDED.

DEFENCE OF SIR DOUGLAS HAIG

GENERAL STAFF NOT BLAME-

ABLE

(Australian and N.Z. Cable Association)

London, Jan. 24. In the House of Commons, Mr Davies, in moving an adjournment, said that in view of the vigorous press campaign the Government should make a | statement regarding Cambrai in order to. reassyre the country. Disquieting rumours and stories of officers from the front were causing , misapprehension in the country and in'tto Army. Nothing could he gained by a policy of secrecy. They had been told conflicting stories, that ; the sector was thinly held at the time of the say-prise attack, that it was manned by entire divisions recently engaged at Ypres, that the higher command disregarded repeated warnings from units holding, the front, that no preparations were made against tho attacks, and that French, reinforcements nearby might have been available if asked for. Mr Davies .opposed an inquiry. The Commander-in-Chief was alone respon-

CABLE. NEWS.

[Pbkss Association.—CopxEiQm.l

aiblo for any military1, disaster in France. Mr J. King criticised. Sir Douglas Haig, and urged, the appointment of a new Commander-in-Clief Mr Kennedy-Jones (?) demanded a clear statement that the Government was satisfied that Sir Dot glas Haig was I the best possible commander. -

Mr J. I. Macpherson, Parliamentary Secretary for the War Office, in replying, said that nothing could be more cruel than attacks of this sort on probably the most distinguished general of tire time, when he had no opportunity of defending, .himself, and while he was leading one of the greatest armies in the world and coping with the greatest difficulties in theVorld. He unhesitatingly said that Sir Douglas Haig had never lost the confidence of tie Army Cotncil or the War Office. Mr Macpherson admitted the breakdown at Cambrai. The General Staff -knew on November 28th that the enemy contemplated an attack on the 30th. He could not go beyond Mr ■Bonar Law's statement. If Sir Douglas Haig had not initiated an inquiry Mr Dayies would have been the first to cavil. The breakdown was not tie fault of the General Staff's dispositions of the. troops. Good reinforcements were also ready. The War Cabinet decided that no one in the higher command was blameable for the reverse, whicb could not have been avoided. There was a breakdown at a particular point of the line, but there was no salienC. There was an inequality of forces at tl.e particular part, despite the fact that the General Staff took all the necessary precautions'. Tie Government did not intend publishing the report. A feature of the debate was Mr Kennedy Jones's remarkable speech. He startled the House by declaring that everyone knew there was the gravest dissatisfaction with the Com-mander-in-Chief after "the Somme campaign of 1916. He did not attain Hs objectives, and sacrificed more men than would have been necessary to obtain success- Sir Douglas Haig's services were retained at the beginning of 1917 because Cabinet was assured that his removal would lead to a great newspaper opposition. Sir Douglas Haig promised that if left alone and given the men he could guarantee certain results by October, 1917. He had not obtained them.