EARLY DAYS OF THE WAR.

Taranaki Daily News, 5 June 1919, Page 5

EARLY DAYS OF THE WAR.

STRONG CRITICISM, MR. ASQUITH TAKES OFF THE GLOVES. "A TRAVESTY ON THE IJEAL FACTS. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received June 4, 710 p.m. London, June 3. Mr. Asquith, speaking at a complimentary luncheon, replied to the statements in Lord French's book. Mr. Asquith complained that Lord French had been given access to official and confidential documents to build up a case against men whose lips were closed, some by death, others by official restraint. It was a flagrant breach of the best traditions of the public service. None knew better than Lord French that his charge against the Liberal Government of callousness in failing to supply sufficient guns and shells was without foundation. Documents which Would be published shortly would prove that Lord French's visit to Paris in September, 1914, was a travesty on the real facts. Prior to the dispatch of Lord Kitchener to Paris, Lord French's intended movements had filled the Government with consternation, and the Parisian Government feared that the French army was going to be left in the lurch. Mr. Asquith flatly denied Lord I 7 ranch's assertion that he advocated high explosives instead of shrapnel before the war. Mr. Asquith quoted a document showing that Headquarters asked the Government in November, 1914, to reduce the percentage of high explosives from 50 to 25 per cent. Mr. Asquith quoted Lord Kitchener's letter, written on the eve of the famous Newcastle speech, in which he said Lord French had told him that with the present supply of ammunition he would have a® much as the troops were alil« to use for the next attack. Mr. Asquith said that General French's intended movements of the army prior to Lord Kitchener's visit filled the Cabinet with consternation- They would have left France in the lurch at a moment of extreme need. The French Government shared this alarm. Between September 1914 and 1915, the forces in the field were increased fourfold, and the munitions nineteenfoW. The manufacturers promised, a much larger output of munitions than they actually supplied. Mr. Asqnith concluded by reading Lord French's private letter of May. IMS, stating: " In the whole history of war no commander-in-chief has been helped in his difficult task by the head of the Government as I have been supported and strengthened by your unfailing sympathy and encouragement." Mr. Asquith accepted full responsibility for Lord' French's recall, which had no more to do with shells than the eclipse of the moon.—Aus. and N.Z. Cable "Assoc.

PLAN THAT WASN'T TRIED.

A COASTWISE ATTACK. INTERESTING INNER HISTORY. Received June 4, 9.30 p.m. London, May 23. Lord French, in a further article in the Daily Telegraph, states: "In September I formed the opinion that it was extremely desirable to push coastwise and northward and drive the Germans from the sea. Mr. Churchill enthusiastically supported the plan and promised an absolutely devastating naval support."

Lord French anticipated Joffre and the French Government would oppose the plan. Mr. Churchill, on December 8, wrote stating that Lord Kitchener fully agreed with the plan, promising to send the 27th Division. Cabinet next day strongly urged the plan upon the French Government, which referred the question to General Joffre. He rejected it, as he had another elsewhere, "which." says Lord French, "was a very l&SIe substitute."

Mr. Churchill continued to press the matter, urging Lord French again to [nut the Admiralty views before General | Joffre. Lord Kitchener, in a memorI andum of January 9, 1915, showed that the War Council had abandoned the coastwise advance on the grounds that it would be too costlv, and would extend the line too far. Heavy reinforcements could not be furnished without disorganising the general arrangements, and a sufficient supply of ammunition was not available to ensure carrying the project through to a conclusion, though every effort was being made in all "parts of the world in order to obtain an unlimited supply. The War Council also anticipated a strong German atta«!k in the near future, which could better be resisted in the existing prepared positions. Lord French disajijees with those objections seriatim, and mentions that large train-loads of ammunition traversed France for a few months later, bound for the Dardanelles. He considers these reasons for rejecting the plan for a coastal attack illogical- Probably the true explanation was to be found in the | War Council's memorandum of January [9, in which the view was expressed that j operations on the west front would probably develop into a stalemate, and that it would be necessary to find another theatre of war where decisive results were obtainable.

, lord French's opinion was invited on the matter. Lord French replied, discussinsr all possible theories, including Gallipoli. He said the attack on Turkey would be devoid of a decisive result. iTibe onlv decisive theatre was Germany itself. Lord French added: "It is quite feasible to break the German line with a sufficiency of guns and high explosive shells. In any case it would be unsafe to withdraw troops from the western front, which is vital, and where alone decisive results are obtainable." General Joffre expressed a final opinion on May IS, 1915. that it was necessary to be prepared for a German offensive in the near future. The front must be made absolutely secure. The Allies must be ready to assume the offensive. Reserves were absolutely neoessary, and all secondary operations, including the ■Flanders coast attack, must give way thereto. Lord French concludes that he always disagreed with these views, and remains convinced that his plan should have been accepted and tried, whereas those actually employed only resulted in feeble and unsuccessful attempts to . break the German line, and absolute failure at tlra Aa». K& Qt&fe

PRESS VIEWS. m ASQUITH DISSIPATES FRENCH'S ACCUSATIONS. •Received June 4, 10.50 p.m. London, May 23. The Westminster Gazette recalls Lord French's eulogy of Lord Kitchener in the House of Lords on June 20, 1916, yet persecution has agam lifted its ugly head. The Gazette asks whether Lord French did not intend to retire on his base and leave the French army in the lurch; whether the French Government) did not protest earnestly, and Cabinet thereupon deputed Lord Kitchener personally to convey to Lord French their decision that he should not retire as proposed. Apart from the anti-Kitchener Northcliffe press, the newspapers generally consider Mr. Asquith has dissipated Lord French's accusations. They especially draw attention to Lord French's eulogy of Mr. Asquith three days after the Liberal Government's fall, whereas Lord French now states he engineered the fall in order to save the country from ruin.—Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assoc.