WAR CRITICS.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 181, 9 June 1916, Page 4 (Supplement)

WAR CRITICS.

Admiral Sir Cyprian Bridge is evidently :i forceful writer as well as a go k1 .seaman. Quite recently he lias be-ni devoting a little attention to t!ie war critics, and in the '"l'all Mall Gazette'' lie tills the public .iust what he thinks of them. His first observat on is that war critics are distinctly differentiated from other critics. Criticism, he say-, is judgment; but the method of th. war critic is disparagement. A l.terafy critic does —at any rate, occasionally

come acro-s a well-written book : ;.n art critic sometimes gees a wei'-painted picture; but your war critic, when discoursing aliout a current war never finds anything in it well manage .1. Past experience, even hi.s own, tells him nothing. He is very likely ignorant of the fact—though, if lie were aware of it, it would make no difference in his method—that every great director of a war an/1 every great naval or mil tary commander, lias been subjected to disi paragement by the critics in his day. In proof of this, Sir Cyprian Bridge reminds us that few admirals have been more abused, lampr.oned and cai"oa:ur etl than Richard Karl Howe—the " Black Dick" of his adm ring sailors — before he won the Glorious f'ir>t of 1 June. One might write a volume cf the unfavourable comments on Wellmg--1 ton during the earlier years of the Peninsular War. One critic has recorded in print hi : ; conclusion that Napoleo-i knew little of tactics; what lie d:d know, he* had been taught by Marmont. C'arnot, the 'Organiser of Victory," was so vilified by his coiitom- ' poiary war critics that it was decided to kill hni. He was saved from ' the guillotine, not by his merits, but by the lucky accident of finding ri * the overcoat pocket of a colleague at 3 the moment a much-needed "scrap of paper." In view of this incident, Sir Cyprian thinks that even Chancellor von Bethmann-Hoilweg would admit ' that sometimes a scrap of paper has 1 importance. During the long years t of his conquest of Gau 1 , Caesar had i.is ' detractors in ltome, as General Grant ) afterwards had his in Washington. A > few months ago our o\yn war critics s devoted their powers of disparagement i to the proceedings of the Navy. Tiioir . comments left little to be desired m i the matter of force. It is a pity that - when they were discoursing thote was : not a gramophone handy, so thai their , sapient remarks might be on durable t record. A stingy man, hoping to he thought generous, might safely offer . a handsome-reward for the di-covery cf . any apology from them for their utter- . ances on naval operations. He would certainly not have to part w th his money. When it was borne in upon even their intelligence that the Navy, with the navies of our Allies, had achieved the greatest success known ;n history, they dropped sea affairs and betook themselves to the cntic'fm i f the way in which the war has been conducted on land. Here, again, everything was wrong; and here again there was a far from obscure suggestion that they could have done the thing better themselves. Shreds of squadron gossip and camp gossip—what sailors used to call "galley yarns" and shore-going people would call "scullery talk"—garnished their dot ion; and awestruck l dowager ; and maidens trembled over I th. ii- teicups when listening to a catalogue of the stupidities of this admiral and the frivol ites of that general, imparted to the expound ng critic by some irresponsible tripper ju.-t back from the fleet or from the front. The'*] fact is. the Admiral proceeds, our war critics are of the brood of Mrs. Gummidge. That lady, it will be remembered, to kan uniavourab'e, not to say lugubrious view of affairs. I'nlike our war crit c-, she did not >uggc.-t nor hint that she had be n horn to set them right. Lord Beaeonsfield once said that a critic was a person who iiad failed in the vocation the perform ances of which he criticised. Few, ir any, of our war cnt cs ever had a chance of trying their hand and risking failure at the conduct of sea or land campaigns. They have no practical experience of that about which they lay down the law so confidently and so gloomily : and there is nothing in their utterances to show that tlic-y have replied cd the defect by special study. Let it be conceded —as is only right—that they do effect something They do aggravate the pess mi-m of the timorous and tne ignorant. Tiny swell the v.o doubt contemptible but still d; p'erablc ch'U'us of thoughtlc-s ciamourcrs that ".something might l-e done." 1; is no use talking to these ent'es; tiiev will not, perhaps —such is the force o; pessimistic obsession —they (annot change tlic.r mood. It is not i;.uth u>e talking about them : but overyn-.K. who

Lears t!iv im ( .in !r.> n-'t :ui:i.l tiijiii, hut l:> (In i::s hit, I:!- !i ve! !:Oit, to iho-o who have t-> <ond;:u t'v war to carry it on to a and, as far a.- may !».», :in early ur:u nat'on. Tin' ablest and m.'-t exii'-riemed i!iorty on war, ii u ••{ tv>p •nvM.> • >o;ii;> di'urco or in some part for tl.o eondirt of i:. when lie e--a\- the la 4: of er:ucism wo: ks in a mental awi;. :• pii• r.> «111:ia i: alike that t nv. loiiu. _■ !:;■-> wli.i d'ri' -l or e.v.eute t!i• ■ ops rat >ll-. Ti: > opinion uf rueh a cn'te wi'i he wortn having: l-<>t v.o note tee condit ion- in which alone it <-in I <• formal. 3!n. cover, t! loij u; 11 the erii :<• may 'a very u - lie will Ii" wi~e the 1 v.it. Th : s may not completely invalidate his cri'i ii-111. I>ut it will impair iin utility. S,v, ■ • i:_!:t { • tax • 1 for ul::.t it s !i. and no :..o:\\

HI'MOCR* or v-';. In the cour-e of hi- visitations ITIO Vicar called upon Mrs. Stevens, aged [ eighty-three, si ml the con vn-ation naturally turned npnn the s'ih.ioct of war. which the described as sonrthinji exceedingly dreadfui. "It's what we maim oxivrr," reioined the old lady. "The old Hook says as how there should lie wars and rummers 0' wars. The Crimean Avar v.ere had enough. It weiv a rum un' Hiit this 'ore i- a 'rummer, and no mi take."