An American Mischief-maker.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16423, 17 January 1919, Page 6

An American Mischief-maker.

Some weeks ago wo published a cable message referring to some 1 ridiculous stories appearing in an American paper regarding the existence of jealousies between the Allied generals in Franco. We have now before us the article, somewhat summarised, in the Baltimore " Sun," in which these tales were given publicity. Tho writer, Mr Frank Kent, managing editor of the "Sun," had been one of a party of American editors who were the guests of the British Government at Home and in France, and had returned to the States directly after the armistice was signed. Keferring at outset to the Peace Conference, lie said that there would be no senseless imperilling of humanity's. happiness through the splitting of the nations that won the war—"Things will not go "as far as that," "But that," he continued, "does not alter the fact that "for weeks past, under the surface, "Paris has been simply seething with " international jealousies, friction, and "feeling, that between us and our "noble Allies at this time there is a " tension and a strain that does not " appear on tho top, but that is very "real none the less." The truth was, declared Jvlr Kent, that America was not loved in Government and political circles, either in England or France. Those who entertained this feeling of more or less veiled' hostility towards America were charged with Tesenting the fact that since Amorica entered the war she had held all the big cards and Mr Wilson had done all the dealing, and European statesmen who had been big figures during the war did not like to see themselves sinking into obscurity. It was also alleged that the European Allies were anxious to secure territorial advantages, whereas the strength of America's position was that no American statesman sought anything for America. As for the generals, it was stated that Pershing was anything but popular "over there" with the French and British high the distaste for him dating back to the early spring of 1917, when "in a memorable conference with Focii and Haig he said, " in effect, that the American army was "at their disposal to do what they " wanted, but it would have to be used " as an army and there would be no | 1 " more splitting of it up. The French " were furious —not only at what Pershi " ing said, but at the way he said it, ; " which was in the most outspoken " American language imaginable, and | "not, it is said, entirely free from pro- | " fanity."

The long articlo of which the foregoing is but the briefest summary, was published far and wide throughout the States and Canada, and, happily, wherever it was published it met with, contempt, denunciation, and ridicule. Public men of all classes of opinion hastened to express their opinion that the charges were untrue and based on prejudice. The Secretary of "War declaredj from his personal observation when in Franco, that the relations between Focli, Haig, Petain, and Pershing were "cordial, '' sympathetic, an;l in every way " happy." Prominent men, both French and American, who had visited the Western front during the year, denied with emphasis, cases almost with, fury, Mr Kent's assertions that the French sneered at the British General Staff, that/neither England nor France " had any time for Italy," and that it was tho support that Mr Wilson had given to tho Clemenceau Government that liad kept it in power. Mr Kent must indeed have made singularly poor use of his time in France if he did not 1 lear» of the extraordinary hold that Clemenceau has upon his fellow countrymen. Mr Stephane Lauzanne, editor in chief of the Paris "Matin," and just then in Ne'.v York as chief of the Official Bureau of French Information, scoffed at the whole article, and "sug-

gested that Mr Kent had been listening to and had reuroduced tittle-tattle.

'•May I ask (he said) what chauffeur told Frank R. Kent that Marshal Foch and General Pershing had such a <l" ar " in such language, that had Pershing been a Frenchman lie would have had to fight a duel with Poch : what kitchen he heard that in Juiy, 1918, General Pereliing was obliged to give som.> lessons of strategy to Marshal Foch and to tell him bluntly that it was 'bad policy to stick around waiting on the Boche' and in what bars of the boulevards ho learned that there was a disposition to extend the ot France to tho Rhine and to tho Alps. The Xcw York "Sun" summed up the caso against Mr Kent by remarking that the whole structure of his insinuations and accusations appeared to be based on the petulant utterances of irritated men, on boulevard gossip, on surmise, conjccture, and personal ill-will, perhaps resulting from personal disappointment.

There may be, probably will bo, differences of opinion at the Peace Conference—they are almost inevitable under tho circumstances. But that they will arise from petty jealousies or result in permanent estrangements we refuse to believe. So far as Mr Kent's article is concerned, its effcct seems to have been to provoke the warmest appreciation of what France and Britain had done, rather than to create any bitterness against them. The most generous recognition of the Allies' services, and especially, it seoms, of those rendered by Britain, has poured from the American Press. ''America to-day," said the Kansas City "Star," "salutes "tho British Commonwealth, worthy " inheritor of a great tradition, cham- " pion of freedom, dauntless of heart " Of tho road to Mons the Boston "Tran- " script.'' referring to the British arrival there just as the armistice was signed, wrote : ''It is the road of a great "nation's great endeavour—the Toad " of tho greatest offering of blood and "treasure that a nation ever made, a "road of sorrows innumerable and un- " tellable, but also of the joy of sacri- '' ficc and heroism and eventual tri"umph." Another journal spoke of Great Britain as having shown "as "sublime a courage, as invincible a

" spirit, as unwavering a faith, and as "knightly an example of self-sacri.fi c!o " as the annals of the human race dis- " close." Mr Kent's effusion should have been printed in Germany. 1 As M. Lauzanno said, it -would have a large circulation there, "and deserved it."