THE HIGH COMMAND.

Hokitika Guardian, 8 February 1918, Page 3

THE HIGH COMMAND.

CHARGES AGAINST POLITICIANS

LONDON January 2G

The most dramatic discovery of the war is raging regarding the High Command, strategy, and man-power. (All tfie newsppers and members of Parliament' are now taking a hand, whilst the questions are the general topic for a strong discussion by the public.

Though tlic names of Mr. Lloyd George, Sir Douglas Haig, and Sir William Robertson are freely dragged in, they have not taken part in the controversy, appearing to the public as great figure in the shadows behind their partisans.

Colonel military correspondent of the “Morning Post,” who with the “Morning Post” and the “Daily News” is the Chief champion of the army’s commanders, charges Mr Lloyd George and the. “Downing street camarilla” with poisonous intrigues again Sir Douglas Haig, and Sir Wm. Robertson; whilst 'tile other side clalrmthat the General Staff launched the attack against, Mr Lloyd George and skilfully mobilised its press supporters in strong campaign. REPINGTON ACCUSES GOVERN MENT.

Undoubtedly Colonel Repington lies taken the war into the Cabinet’s camp. He asserts that the Government failed to. provide sufficient manpower, with the result that divisions were exhausted and were greatly under tlieir strength, while the Germans were concentrating 220 divisions on the West thereby producing the most critical situation.

Colonel Repingtoii’s campaign represents ex parte “Westernism,” ignoring the'vital shipbuilding, naval, and munition necessaries of the position.

In tho House of Commons, Mr Macpliarson, Parliamentary Under Secretary for War significantly said: “The breakdown lias always been put down to the High Command. Tt is never the men who made tho mistake,” Pressed for an allocation of the blame, lie added, i It i g impossible to say in dealing with two or three divisions.” The i “Pall Mall Gazette,” in its comments on the position, says: “fine country is more mystified than ever. According to Mr Macpherson the breakdown was due either to incapacity or insubordination of the leaders or the instability of the troops. If the latter, there must have been ineffective leadership or inadequate training. The public is convinced that a policy of concealment is employed to veil incompetence. The “British Weekly” says: “How far and how deep differences have

veloped between Sir Douglas Haig and Air Lloyd George it is impossible to state definitely, but the situation cannot he prolonged without' the utmost danger.”