The Cambrai Reverse

Taihape Daily Times, 25 January 1918, Page 5

The Cambrai Reverse

DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE,

NO ONE TO BLAME

STATEMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT.

REPORT NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Received 8.45.

LONDON, Jan 24.

In the House of Commons, Major Davies, in moving the adjournment, said in view of the vigorous press campaign tie Government should make* a statement regrading Cambrai in order to reassure the country. Disquieting rumours and stories of officers from the front were causing misapprehension in the country and the army. Nothing was to be gained by a policy of secrecy. They had been told conflicting stories. That the sector was thinly held at the time of the surprise at.tf.ck; that it was manned by entire divisions recently engaged at Ypres; that the Higher*" Command dnyegardsd repeated warnings from units holding the front; that no preparations were made against attacks; that French reinforcements nearby might probably have been available lr asked for. Major Davies opposed an

enquiry by the Commander-in-Chief, who alone was responsible for any military disaster in France,

Mr King criticised Sir Douglas Haig, and urged the appointment cf a new Commander-in-Chief. Mr Macpherson, replying, said nothing could be crueller than attacks of this sort en probably the most distinguished general of our time, when he had no opoprtunity of defending himself, and while leading one of the greatest armies in the world and coping with the greatest difficulties in the world He unhesitatingly said that Sir Douglas Haig had never lost the confidence of the Army Council and War Office. Mr Macpherson admitted the breakdown at Cambrai, The General Staff knew on November 28 that the enemy contemplated aja attack on the thirtieth. He could not go beyond that.

Bonar Law stated that if Sir Douglas Haig had cot initiated an inquiry, Major Davies would have been the first to cavil. The breakdown was not the fault cf the General Staff. The dispositions of troops was good, and reinforcements were also ready. The "War Cabinet decided that no one in the higher command was blameable for the reverse which could not have been avoided. There was a breakdown at a particular point of the line, but there was no salient, but there was an inequality of forces at a particular part, despite the fact that the General Staff took all necessary precautions. The Government did not intend publishing the report.