The Daily News. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1915. WHY BRITAIN WAS UNPREPARED.

Taranaki Daily News, 30 October 1915, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1915. WHY BRITAIN WAS UNPREPARED.

Speaking in the House of Commons this week, Mr. John Dillon said that the live months' campaign at the Dardanelles should drive out Lord Haldane (ex-War Minister) from public life. Mr. Robert Blatchford, the well-known Socialist writer, in a recent contribution to the Weekly Despatch, takes a very much stronger view, for he says that Lord Haldane's pro-Germanism before the wur was notorious. ''Lord Haldane," he says, '•'persistently cried peace," and encouraged and supported the members of his party who were demanding a reduction of armaments, while admitting, in a speech at the National Liberal Club, that the Cabinet had known for years that war was coming. It is interesting to note that the reason given by Lord Haldane for not, making larger preparations was the fear of the' Cabinet provoking a German attack. Seven months before the war he said, in a speech, that ''Europe is an armed camp, but an armed camp in which peace not ouly prevails, but in which the indications are that there is a far greater prospect of peace than ever there was before. No one wanted war." The task of reconciling these statements is one that would tax the most subtle intellect. They cannot possibly be made to fit. What then are we to believe was Lord Haldane's real opinion on this vital matter? It must be remembered that Lord Haldane is one of the most scholarly men in Parliament, but he had not held office until becoming Secretary of State for War. To most people the appointment of an eminent lawyer as the head of the British War Office would seem rather a Gilbcrtian farce, but it proved far worse than that—a national disaster that has caused a terrible sacrifice of the manhood of the Empire, besides many millions of money, It seems almost beyond mortal coinpre-

l>.-nsion thai Hi.' British Cabinet "had known for years that war was coming"; hi.d seen Europe become an armed camp, and yet had taken no steps to meet the Armageddon beyond putting the Navy into a state of predominance and forming a Territorial Army which was not available for foreign service unless it volunteered. The late Lord Roberts saw that war with Germany was inevitable, and for many years devoted his life to the furtherance of the only means of coping with the threatened evil—compulsory national service, but all in vain. When the war came it found Britain totally unprepared with land forces, while at the head of the 'War Office was a lawyer who was obsessed with the idea I hut the armed camps in Europe were iiir evidence of pacific intentions, and that the naked torch could be flourished ever the open powder magazines without fear of disaster. After fourteen months the terrifying roar of the explosion is still all too deafening, and is likely to last, for some considerable time yet. Mr. Blntchford states that in 1912 Lord Haldane knew quite well the real feeling ip. Germany, and that neither flatteries nor protestations would shake her deadly purpose, but "he continued to rode the national cradle and sing soft lullabies in our ears." The moment Britain began the. expansion of her armed forces the want of a system of universal service was at once apparent. There were battalions with no one to drill or direct them, and an utter lack of uniforms, arms, and equipment. There were, too, ao barracks for thousands of the men. The difficulties to be overcome were immense, and these were due to the fact that the nation and Parliament had refused to contemplate or prepare for the contingency of a great land war, though for ten years its approach had been evident to all but the wilfully blind. That Britain did accomplish the formidable task of raising and equipping between three and four mllion men is a tribute to her powers and resources when thoroughly aroused to action. It was a magnificent achievement of which the Empire may be proud, but it was due to the spur of necessity, not to the existence of a wise and prudent policy such as that for which Lord Roberts so insistently pleaded. If, contends Mr. Blatchford, we could have thrown half a million of men into Belgium there would have been no retreat from Mons, and Belgium and Franco would not have been outraged and over-run. Lord Roberts was right and Lord Haldane was absolutely wrong. Strong as is this indictment against the ex-War Secretary, it by no means completes the tally, for there is the munitions muddle still to be sheeted home, and the direful results of that blunder are only too well known. We can hardly be surprised that an outcry against Lord Haldane should be made, though not on the ground of proGermanism. As an apostle of clear thinking he was imbued with German philosophy and so was absorbed in their views. His loyalty is unquestionable, but his administrative perceptions were evidently dominated by philosophy of a dangerous species. Mr. Blatchford shows him no mercy, remarking that if we are to do our duty to the bravest and finest army Britain ever had, and if we are to defeat the foulest and bitterest enemy we ever fought, we shall have to scrap our blunderers. Putting sentiment on one side, the argument is sound, and one that in business affairs is the rule. How much more vital is its adoption in national affairs? The blunders in the present war have cost, the Empire irreparable losses, and there Is a growing demand that the authors shall be, as Mr. Dillon put it, driven out from public life.