FRENCH'S BOOK

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10298, 5 June 1919, Page 5

FRENCH'S BOOK

CHARGES AGAINST KITCHENER ME ASQUITH MAKES FURTUEK STATEMENT. Australian and N.Z. Cablo AssociationUiscsived Juno i, 7.10 p.m.; LONDON, Juno a. Mr Asquith, speaking at a complimentary luncheon, replied to statements in Lord French's book. Mr Asquith complained that Lord French had been given access to official and confidential documents to build up his case against men whose . lips were closed, some by death, others by official restraint. It was a flagrant breach of the best traditions of the public service. None knew better than Lord French that his charge against the Liberal Government of callousness in failing to supply sufficient guns and shells was without foundation. Documents which would be published, shortly would prove that irench's account of Kitchener's visit to Fans m September, 1914, was -a. travesty ou the real facts. Prior to the dispatch of Lord Kitchener to Fans, Lord French's intended movements had filled the Cabinet with consternation, and the Parisian Government t eared the French army was going to be lelt in tho lurch.

He flatly denied Lord French's assertion tnat he had advocated high explosives instead of -shrapnel before the- war. Mr Asquith quoted a document showing that Headquarters had asked the Government in November, 1914, to reduce the percentage of high explosives from 50 per cent, to 23 per cent. Mr Asquith quoted Lord Kitchener's letter, written on the eve of his famous Newcastle speech, in which he said' Lord French had told him that with the present supply'of ammunition he would have as much as'the troops would be able to use for the next attack.

Air Asquith accepted full responsibility for Lord French's recall, which had no more to do with shells than the eclipse of the moon. FURTHER ARTICLE BY FRENCH BRITISH AND FRENCH LEADERS DIFFER. - (Received June'4, 9.30 p.m.) LONDON, June 3. Lord French, in a further article in the ''Daily Telegraph/' states: —'"In September I formed the. opinion that it was extremely desirable to push coastwise and northward and drive the Germans from the sea. Mr Churchill enthusiastically supported andijpromißed ; :'ah absio'utely devastating port." Lord French anticipated that General Joffre rind'the French Government -would oppose the plan. Mr Churchill, on December Bth, wrote stating that Lord Kitchener fully agreed with the plan, promising to send the Twenty-seventh Division. ' Cabinet, the next day, strongly urged the plan upon the French Government, which referred the question t'o General :J.offre He rejected it, as he .had another elsewhere, "which," says'Lord French, "proved &. very feeble substitute." Mr Churchill continued to press the matter, urging Lord French again to put t<he Admiralty's views before General* Joffi-ef*. Lord Kitchener, in a memorandum • of January 9th, 1915, showed that the War Council had abandoned the coastwise advance on the grounds that it would be too costly and, would extend the lino too far. Heavy reinforcements could not'be rrfurnished without disorganising the general arrangements, and a sufficient supply' of ammunition was not available to ensure carrying the project through to a conclusion; though overy effort was being made hi all parts of world in order to obtain an unlimited supply. The War Council also anticipated a strong Gorman attack in the near future, which could better be resisted in ' the existing prepared positions. ; "Xbrd French disagreed with these objections seriatim, and mentions that large trainloads of ammunition traversed France a few mpnths later bound for the Dardanelles. He considers these reasons for rejecting, the plan for a coastal attack illogical. Probably the true explanation was to be found in the War Council's memorandum of January 9th. in which the view was expressed that the operations on Hhe West front would probably develop into a. stalemate. It was necessary to find another theatre of war whero decisive, results would be obtainable. Lord French's opinion was invited on the matter, and he replied, discussing all -possible theories, including' G.vllipoli. lie said an attack on Turkey would bo devoid of decisive result. The only decisive theatre \was Germany itself. French added: "It is quite feasible to break the Gorman line with a sufficiency of guns and high-explosive shells. In any case, it. would be unsafe to withdraw troops from the Western front, which is vital, and where alone decisive results are obtainable!" Joffre expressed his final opinion on May 19th, 1915, that it was jiecessnry to be prepared- for a German offensive, in the near future. The front must' bo made absolutely secure, and the Allies must bo ready to assume the offensive. Reserves were absolutely necessary, and all secondary operations, including the Flanders coast attack, must give way thereto. Lord French concludes by saying that he always disagreed with these views, and remains convinced that his plan should haye been accepted and tried, whereas those actually employed only resulted in feeble, unsuccessful attempts to break the German line, and absolute failure at the Dardanelles.

FRENCH'S EfULOGT OF KITCSL

ENER RECALLED; (Received June 4, 10.50 p.m:) LONDON, June 3. Tlie 'TVestnnnster Gazette" recalls Lord French's eulogy of Lord Kitchener in the House of Lords on June 20th. 1916: "Yet persecution has again lifted its ugly head." The "Gazette" asks whether Lord French did not intend to retire on his base and leavOk the French army in the lurch; whether tho French Government did not protest earnestly, and the Cabinet thereupon deputed Lord Kitchener personally to convey to Lord French its decision that ho should not retire as proposed? Apart from the anti-Kitchener Northcliffe Press, the newspapers generally consider that Mr. Asquith ha« ciisß!Dated Lord French's accusations. They especially draw attention to Lord French's eulogy of Mr Asquith three days after the Liberal Government's fall. wfiereas Lord French now states that lie engineered the fall in order to save the country from ruin.