The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1920. OLD WOUNDS.

Southland Times, Issue 18824, 18 May 1920, Page 4

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1920. OLD WOUNDS.

The Empire is not likely to reap much benefit from the exchange of broadsides by Sir lan Hamilton and Mr Keith Murdoch and the reopening of old wounds. On the one hand General Hamilton has resented bitterly the intervention of a newspaper man as a critic of the campaign he was controlling, and many people will sympathise with his viewpoint; but Mr Murdoch himself is on unimpeachable ground and the events subsequent to his report were such as to vindicate him. He was sent to the Dardanelles partly as a war correspondent and partly as a representative of the Australian Government to conduct inquiries regarding administration matters, but there is nothing to suggest that Sir lan Hamilton knew the real nature of his mission. He seems to have regarded Mr Murdoch as an Australian journalist to whom special privileges should be given; but it seems fairly clear that Mr Murdoch was really at Gallipoli as the agent of the Australian Cabinet, though his status as a war correspondent probably assisted him in the execution of his delicate duties. Although he confessed to Sir lan Hamilton that he knew nothing of “soldiers and soldiering,” the general cannot derive much benefit from that admission in the way of belittling Mr Murdoch as an amateur general, because his views on the situation seem to have been confirmed subsequently by Lord Kitchener and Fir Charles Monro. That disposes effectually of Sir lan’s gibes at the war correspondent’s “general’s” military knowledge. It seems to us that Mr Murdoch in the course of the duties ho was sent to the Dardanelles to fulfil saw things and Heard things from officers there which convinced him that he should acquaint Mr Andrew Fisher with what he believed to be the facts of the case. Mr Murdoch evidently did not mince matters. He spoke strongly because he felt strongly and Mr Fisher rightly decided that these views, for what they were worth, should be made known to the British Cabinet, The action that resulted from Mr Murdoch’s report m no way discredits him, although Sir lan Hamilton, looking at the matter from his own standpoint, probably came to regard the journalist as something in the nature of a political agent sent out to do a little of what he now calls “stiletto work.” The general might find a lot of evidence to confirm him in that view, but Mr Murdoch seems to have acted fairly and honestly throughout. He did not break any censorship pledge in writing to Mr Fisher as he did and if his statements ever reached the public eye he could not be blamed. Perhaps this incident is being confused with another in which Mr Ashtnead Bartlett had a part. Whatever may be the view of the propriety of sending Mr Murdoch on such a mission, there can be no question of the newspaperman’s bona fides. The comment regarding General Birdwood’s finalities is not fully explained. Sir lan Hamilton charges Mr Murdoch with having stated that General Birdwood “hadn't fighting quality.” This is intended to show that Mr Murdoch’s estimate was woefully incorrect, and there can bo no doubt that such a criticism of the Soul of Anzac would not bo well received by the Aussies or the New Zealanders who were at the Darden-

dies or who later served under the general in France. Mr Murdoch's reply to Sir lan Hamilton is not quite definite, but from the context it would appear that the journalist’s objection to General Birdwood was not based on his lack of “fighting qualities,” but on that officer’s desire to continue fighting. Mr Murdoch says frankly that he considered the continuation of the campaign to be hopeless and expensive, and he feared that General Birdwood, who was opposed to any evacuation, would influence Lord Kitchener into continuing the operations through the winter. There is nothing in such a view to suggest that Mr Murdoch thought that General Birdwood was lacking in “fighting qualities,” and we are prepared to learn that in this matter he has been misrepresented by General Hamilton. The episode raises the whole question of the use of war correspondents as critics of the fighting forces, but although we may sympathise with Sir lan in the difficulties that beset him and the handicaps under which ho laboured from the initiation of the campaign to the last offensive, there can be no doubt that the Australian pressman did the Empire a great service in stirring the Coalition Cabinet into activity. His justification must always be the fact that at least two generals of great reputation and long experience supported his view, ordered the evacuation and saw it carried out in spite of Sir lan Hamilton’s contention that it was impossible. The incident is to be regretted, and with two such excellent penmen we may have to hear more of the “inside history” of a campaign which heaped so much glory on the troops engaged and so much obloquy on some of the people connected with its inception and control.