ANZACS IN PALESTINE.

Taihape Daily Times, 16 October 1919, Page 5

ANZACS IN PALESTINE.

LORD ALLENBY’S ATTITUDE. AUSTRALIAN COl\'ll-’LAIN'I‘S. ' SYDNEY, Oct. 1. Whether Field Marshal Lpl'd Allenby's failure to mention specially the work of the Australian men in Palestine when praising the performances of the heterogenous troops under his command," was deliberate or not, it has certainly served to give voice to :1. very bitter feeling towards him which is felt by the Light Horsemen in Australia. Several letters in the newspapers state that the Australians and New Zealanders were treated by him as the bad boys of the family, and that, though they suffered numerous -o.ut'r-ages and indignities at the hands of the natives they were not allowed to I'etarliate. _ Mr Harry Gullett, the offieial press representative with the Allstl'aliall forces in Palestine, in a statement, says:——v _’ ' “The whole question of the attitude of the British General Staff to the Aust'ralians_in Egypt had to be raised sooner or later. If 3Lieu‘fen~ant-General Sir Archibald Murray, -and Field—Mar—shul I.0:'(i Allenby c... the majority -of his stair’ officers in their hearing towards the Australians represented the feelings of the British public men, then the British Empire would be shortlived. Happily, we know they do not.

“The Australians were shabbily treated throughomt: the campaign. It was the policy of general headquarters to treat the mas bad boye of the family, The British could do no wrong. Every petty indignity suffered by the so—called Moslems -of Rale’stine was credited to the Australian and New Zealandlroops. That’ was the deliberate headquai-tex's policy. The astute Arabs came to know it. and‘. always begar). their complaints by saying ‘The aolclier wearing the big hat. ’ Murray and Lord Allenby had .to be fought“ f;o_r.. anything. appl‘oaellin_g _a I fail-I share of official recognition and a4wa'r(ls for the Australians. ‘Since -the Armis-1 ti‘cc=Lord -Allenby,~eou.t of- pique, po~int—_: edly omitted naming the Anzac Mount- I ed Division ._fronylg his finial, _ lisp.‘ of’; honou_rs‘.A “Take the question, bf ‘st.-’nr appoint'nlent_s. .'Until alrnost __the end‘ of :the campaign, the Afistralian force, was swamped with _British,‘st.alf officers, i few of Whom were equal. and all of‘ them vvere.-i~afierior. to Augstralians. who were cheateéi oift of their promo-j tion;

“I am not concerned with Lord Al~ loztlzy fir‘, indivirlual, or with his staflf oflieers. One only protests against the great position being abused ‘in a way that must inevitably weaken Imperial sentiment. The Australians fought in a. fine spirit throughout theglong, severe campaign. After the ai".-nistiee they came out ‘to a. man——even cmrvaleseentvs took to ‘he sadtlle——and played a prominent 1?.-art-iii quelling the Egyptian rebellion. At the time when a great part of the British troops were striking :Ind_g'enel'ally out of hand, the Australians and New Zealanders were perfectly disciplined and dependable. ifet, thanks to the treatment they‘ received from the British command, the commonest saying amongthe Light House offi. eers in Egypt wasi ‘No more wars under 2.. British. Command. -If we fight with England again it _inust' be as Allies.’ .” . . ~ . _