The Daily News. MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 1918 THE CAMBRAI AFFAIR.

Taranaki Daily News, 28 January 1918, Page 4

The Daily News. MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 1918 THE CAMBRAI AFFAIR.

The discussion which was recently raised in the House of Commons over the break down at "Cambrai is eminently characteristic of the peculiar grumbling -methods of British politicians who, but for taking advantage of the rules of the House, and asking all sorts of awkward questions, would otherwise be obscure. It is not, however, characteristic of British sense of justice to condemn a man who las no opportunity of defending himself, especially one who holds such a responsible position as Sir Douglas Haig. It would be a bad day for the army if its commanders were to be judged and condemned 'by the crowd merely because a reverse had been suffered and all sorts of rumors were in circulation as to the cause. Irresponsible critics and fault finders are always available and their croakings ever ready for utterance. In war we must expect reverses as well as victories, and take both with good grace. . The proper tribunal to test the merits or faults of military operations is not the men in the street or the busybody in Parliament, but the responsible authorities whose duty it is to obtain and analyse the facts before arriving at any decision. It is quite right and proper that in every case where there i s a cause for inquiry

the proper steps shouW be taken to ascertain whether a blunder has been made and if so who was responsible, so that the offenders may be dealt with and incompetent or rash officers removed from their positions, but'the quieter this is done the. better it i s for the morale of the array. At the same time it is unseemly and unwise for any such agitation, as which has been made by a section of the British press and by others against Sir Douglas Haig to be got oa foot. It may be gratifying to the enemy, but it is humiliating to the Allies as well as to the army. The British Parliament agreed to the appointment of n War Cabinet, an-i having done so should evince a full trust and confidence in that Council as the supreme' authority for deciding all matters connected with the war, and it is that Council which should be criticised >if Parliament considers it fitting and necessary. In f he ease of Ihe Cambrai failure due inquiry was made, all the documents relating to the affair being submitted to and considered by the Cabinet, but, so that there should not be any doubt on the matter, General Smuts was asked to give his independent opinion, and his report was approved by the War Cabinet. Surely that should have sufficed. If not, it is difficult to conceive what sort of an inquiry would satisfy the curiosity reply to hecklers in the House, the Parliamentary Secretary to the War Office rightly said that nothing could be more cruel than such attacks on "proba'bly the most distinguished general of the time," and he unhesitatingly asserted that Sir Douglas Haig had never lost the confidence of the Army Council or the War Office. The truth of the matter is that the agitation was worked up not because there had been a regrettable reverse, but owing to the disappointment felt at the non-fulfilment of hopes of startjing developments on the West front after the sensational advance of Sir Julian Byng. There is probably some excuse for this disappointment, but there is none for the method whereby it was expressed. We know new, on reliable authority that the advance was an experiment—a costly experiment—but possibly justified by circumstances. The British director of military operations, General Maurice, gave a timely warning against the exaggerated hopes that were expressed in many of the papers concerning that advance, and he drew attention

to the novelty of the method employed, and to the fact that the battle was a complete surprise to the enemy. There was no definite objective, as in the caie of the battles in Flanders and at Arras. Tiie intention was to advance as far as possible and the point gained was a good deal further than Sir Douglas -Hnig expected, though the whole movement was over in three or four days. The evils arising out of exaggerated expectations are always more difficult to cope with than actual troubles, for the reason that unrealised hopes create depression and the reaction which then sets in lias to find a vent, the process involving the pernicious step of fixing on a scapegoat. As a ; consequence the actual position of affairs becomes obscured, and the extent of the gains is lost sight of, merely because there has been a partial retirement when a further advance was deemed a certainty. It is in times of intense strain and stress that the necessity for cool judgment is so essential that it is marvellous how many people, who ought to know better, get out «f hand. Parliament should apply a cold douche to all those neurotical members who intrude their alarmist views on -public attention, anil the press might well leave their Jeremiads unrecorded. 'During the progress of such a world war, when our trusted military commanders are coping with the greatest difficulties and problems that the world has ever known, is not the time for stirring up mud and undermining our confidence in those wlm are fighting our battles. Britain is not taking a lone 'hand in this war, but is acting in close unity with her Allies, so that there is every guarantee that any cause likely to prejudice the war operations may safely be left to the Allied Council to deal with. What appears to he the real cause of resentment is the secrecy maintained by the authorities, and that secrecy is absolutely necessary.