LORD KITUHENER.

Hokitika Guardian, 2 December 1921, Page 4

LORD KITUHENER.

Mil ASQUITH’S K III.0(1 Y. 1 SHELLS CONTROYKRST I?KYIVKI>. i i HKTU \ t.J * N AM* N./. CAULK ASSOCIATION , LONDON'. Noveinboi .‘SO|H. I .Mi- \squitli in an article in ‘‘l>*‘.ir- : Dili’s Magazine.” publishes n letter dated April Mtli.. 101 .~> in which laud Kitclu'iier definitely assured Mr Asi|ni tli himself mi Lord French's authority i lint tile pn'si'iil supply nt' :iniiniilii t,i(>ii ■.vis ns Hindi as (lie troops tvoiild I.'*' Mill, to use in their next fnnvnn! inoccmeiit. Referring to tin 1 charges regarding tlie sliolls shortage which Lord French made in his hook in lit’ and which Lord Esher quoted without comment, hut adopted os history, Mr Asquith writes: ‘'Tlie statement teems with utipiirdonahle inaccuracies, some of which are Hat contradictions to contemporary documents. By the end of April 11110. despite the contractors’ heartrending delays, we were producing in three days as much ammunition as was produced in a whole year in pre-war times. The piuspeet for the near future, however, was serious. It was not our husiness to ninouiagc the enemy by recenling the nature and extent of our disquietude, which was real and threat It was for that reason that Mr Lloyd George and 1 was careful to say on I sad Kitchener’s authority that there was no immediate deartlP of shells at the I'rwiit. Proof that Lord Kitchenur duly enquired hei'nre giving sindi an assurance is shown 1 1 v the following letter dated April Ist.. 101"): ‘Secret. Dear I’rinie Minister. I have had a talk with French. He told me T ( .oiihl inform you that with hi> present supply of ammunition he will have as much as his troops will he able to use in the next forward movement. I think the next move will he better than the last with co-operation from the French forces which failed last. time. Kitchener.’ ”

Mr Asi|uitli contributes an appreciation of Lord Kitchener in ‘'Pearson’s Magazine.” lie traverses Lord Esher’s criticisms and description of Tiord Kitchener which he characterises as a caricature, the only excuse being Lord Esher's superficial knowledge of his subject., ‘'Lord Kitchener was a great man. with certain obvious limitations, some loongenial and othrtrs natural, perhaps the necessary results of his environment. To the last of bin career lie was disposed to he secretive. TTe dill not find it ea.sv to throw his knowledge and judgment into the common stock, but it is an absurd travesty to say that Lord Kitchener at the War Office neither asked nor look advice from any man. From the day he took his post Lord Kitchener was in constant communication and consultation with Sir John Cmvans, Qunrtor-mnstor-flonernL •‘Meanwhile there was set on foot a violent newspaper campaign directed mainly against Lord Kitchener and engineered, according to 1-ord French’s avowal, by the Commander-in-Chief himself in France behind the back of his official chief. Tt is quite possible, but certainly not natural, that Taird Kitchener should at this time he said to have written ‘T. am deadly sick of this system of intrigue’ : hut he never allowed it to ruffle or rattle him. He ignored the clamorous eat calls from a section of the Press whose campaign Lord Fsher quaintly declares to have been dictated by the chance of “the higher expediency.’ Tord Kitchener showed equanimity and. magnanimity saying: ‘T am out to fight, the Germans, not Sir John French.’ ”