A GALLIPOLI FAILURE

Hokitika Guardian, 19 April 1929, Page 4

A GALLIPOLI FAILURE

WAS HEADQUARTERS TO BLAME?

G luted Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.)

LOT'S DON, April 18. The “Daily Telegraph” publishes a chapter from the official Gallipoli history, describing the landing of the ■, English troops on “Y” Beach under q Colonel Matthews, and the subsequent withdrawal of these troops. It tells how Sir lan Hamilton’s signal to General Hunter Weston, asking whether lie wanted more men at “V” Beach remained unanswered. Its repetition brought a reply to .the effect that Admiral Wemyss advised that any alteration to the. arrangements would delay the landing and nothing was done. Therefore a golden opportunity was missed. Had Sir lan Hamilton seen fit to issue definite orders, the whole story of Gallipoli might have been different.

The chapter proceeds to describe how a series of Turkish attacks developed, with new reinforcements “to drive the English into the sea,” even before the “Y” beach detachment had begun to dig. The subsequent losses on both sides were of the heaviest. Despite the Turkish attacks, the British restored their position, but a panic infected a large proportion of the “Y” Beach forces. The book says: So-many versions as to the origin of the unfortunate withdrawals have been given credence that it is important to remember that ■ Colonel Matthews accepted full responsibility at tlw Dardanelles Commission, arguing that the absence of reinforcements left him without a,ny option. He. stated that throughout the twentynine hours of the British tenure of the “Y” Beach, no word reached him from the Divisional Headquarters. His urgent appeals for reinforcements were not replied to, and no officer of the Divisional Staff had been sent to gain a personal knowledge of the position. ’ To all intents and purposes Colonel ‘Matthews had been forgotten. Cleverly conceived, happily opened, j and miserably ended—this is the stor} of “Y” Beach.