BITTER ATTACKS

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 86, 2 December 1931, Page 7

BITTER ATTACKS

a general's book ALLEGES LLOYD GEORGE HAD ■ AN ANTI-BRITISH RIAS. DISPLACING GENERAL HAIG. ' LONDON, Wednesday. Lieut.-General Sir Huhert Gough breaks a silence of 13 years ■with i bitter attacks on Mr. ^oyd George I as well as on Marshal Foch in his hook, "The Fifth Army." I He commanded that army in France in 1918, and was recalled after its disastrous defeat and retreat.' ( Mr. Lloy d George, he states, , show- j ed the worst aspects of his manysided character in a plot to place the British Army under General Nivelle's command, after a decision that the safety and honour of British arms would be better in the keeping of the hands of a Frenchman than in those . of General Haig. He explains that this very difference in control was later accorded to Marshal Foch. The plot was a close secret, and the facts were not previously published in England. Mr. Lloyd George had recently been appointed Prime Minister, and was already lacking in confidence in General Haig in 1916; in fact, he was even intriguing against him, when he met General Neville, whose fluency, in contradistinction to General Haig's and Sir William Robertson's, and Marshal Joffre's silence, was an in-. valuable asset in the' eyes of Mr. Lloyd George. He Ioved a fluent taiker, and was impressed with General Nivelle's high-sounding phrases, such as "brusque rupture" and "clockwork advances," delivered with an air of profundity and astuteness, even if he was unable to understand their real worth. Moreover, General Nivelle's fluent English, owing to his English mother, enabled Mr. Lloyd George to discuss the affairs of the war without an interpreter. Neither Generals Haig nor Robertson had the slightest warning of the revolutionary proposals presented at the Calais Conference, says General Gough. There is little doubt, however, that Mr. Lloyd George was cognisant of the outrageous proposal, giving General Nivelle complete command, and involving the disappearance of the British Army as a whole, although French generalship, staffwork, and tactical efficiency compared unfavourably with that of the British, right through the war, despite the fashion of British Government cireles to declare that it was superior. Unfavourable Coxnparison. It is impossible to explain with justification Mr. Lloyd George's proFrench and anti-English bias," General Gough declares. "Perhaps he has lived long enough to realise his error. It is fortunate for the Empire that this unseemly proposal was laid be-* fore men of such solid character as* Generals Haig and Robertson. That the British leaders, Mr. Lloyd George , and General Haig, had not greater mutual confidence was a disaster, and for this the former was primarily responsible. "General Haig bitterly complained to me of Mr. Lloyd George's ill-eon-cealed admiration for the French generals and soldiers, adding that there was no question as to which it was better to serve under, Mr. Lloyd George or Mr. Asquith. The latter was unfairly blamed. I always found him to be a loyal supporter, while Mr. Lloyd George placed every obstacle in my way, and hampered the conduct of the war."