KITCHENER PICTURED.

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Volume XXI, 12 August 1921, Page 8

KITCHENER PICTURED.

LORD ESHER’S BOOK

Press Assn.—By Tel. —Copyright

LONDON, August 10. Lord Esher’s book, “The Tragedy" of Lord Kitchener,” was published to-day. The author writes: “The title is not evoked by this nature of Lord Kitchener’s death, but is intended to emphasise the tragic spectacle of a great man called to a great task with the full consciousness that the powers with which he had served so steadfastly in the past had deserted him. When Kitchener assumed control ho was no longer the Kitchener of the Soudan, or of South Africa, but only lie iwas aware of that fact. Kitchener found at tho War Office that all except one were aged, tired men, who trembled before him and his reputation. He was denied help and guidance, and in this novel situation he lost his selfconfidence .

“His own vision was clear, but he was unable to communicate it to others. Therefore he was powerless before a Cabinet in which he had no confidence. Accustomed all his life to independent action, Kitchener was at a disadvantage in collective action, and for this reason his colleagues did not accord him their confidence. His steps faltered and his influence waned, so that at the most critical he was hurled into actions of which he did not approve. “He wanted a grand campaign in the Near East, and the failure to gain this resulted in delay and misunderstanding.”

There is a poignant picture of Kitchener on May 14, 1915, subsequent to the demand for more shells.

Kitchener, disquieted, wrote: “1 am ueadly sick of this system of intrign.,, and if I get an excuse I will gst out of it all.”

In this way was repercussion of the events which Lord French had already described, especially Colonel Repington’s notorious telegram to “Tho Times.”

Lord Esher continues: “Kitchener sat alone, in mufti, in the Soudan chair, with a quiet, gentle look. • Tho shell controversy illuminates the man’s strength, his weakness, and self-abne-gation, but displays him unrecoptive of new ideas, disinclined to adopt new methods which he did not originate, and slow to take advantage of the experience of lesser men. Kitchener's mediocre reasoning and stolid approach to obvious conclusions irritated his colleagues and destroyed the admiration, affection, and almost the respect they once felt for him. Kitchener’s inability to convince them of his sincerity was mortifying.

“Tho contrast between tho place he knew he occupied in public esteem and what he knew was tho inner mind of the earnest colleagues he vainly tried to influence and guide composed the tragedy.”