" STEADY."
SIR EDWARD CARSON on Tuesday administered just the right words to cure a political fever. " Steady," he said, was the motto for the moment, and he could not possibly have chosen a better word. It was ffightiness and recklessness of language, in fact language which was the very reverse of " steady," that produced the recent crisis. It matters little that Sir Edward Carson attributed the crisis to other causes. He, we are glad to say, is a British states- man of the old school who takes the highest possible view of the duties of cohesion and collective responsibility among members of a Cabinet. He always assumes that the language of any one member of a Cabinet casts collective credit or discredit upon all the other members. When unwiadom of speech or conduct has been committed by any Minister he takes it for granted that the other Ministers must either stand by him or, if they feel that the unwiadom was beyond forgiveness, must cause him to resign. That used to be the tradition among British statesmen, and we cannot help saying that it would be a good thing if it prevailed more generally to-day. We should have fewer examples of Ministers working at cross-purposes and continually contradicting one another, and yet all continuing to remain in the Ministry as though such contradictions, which really sap the energy and efficiency of government, were a matter of no importance. Sir Edward Carson, as we have said, differs from us as to the origins of the political unrest of last week, but that does not matter in comparison with the fact that he has offered to the country a word which is the master-key to all the problems that lie before us. It is enough for us to reflect that if the Paris speech had never been made Sir Edward Carson's admirable defence of Sir William Robertson and Sir Douglas Haig would never have been necessary. His words were most important: " We have heard of conspiracies against the Army, conspiracies against our own people, the interference of politicians with soldiers, suit of soldiers with politicians, as though we wore all in opposite ramps. The whole thing from beginning to end is a lie, and a mischievous lie. I have no doubt it is brought about in some eases through political machinations, and in other cases through ignorance,. end in still other cases through suspicion ; but I can only ;If for there myself that if for one moment I thought the had been the ell teat idea of the politicians, as we are called, interfering with the so diers in the management of the war, I would not have held my office as a member of the War Cabinet for ten minutes. Audi never will. They talk of dual control and double advice, and all those terrible things that are to confront us in the future. I know of no advisers on military matters except the Imperial General Staff, who attend the meetings of the War Cabinet. And by those advisers I have been, and shall always be, guided, so long an I am allowed to take a part in the consultations of His Majesty's Government. I have met in the course of my work as a member of His Majesty's Government throe groat men—I say that advisedly—Field-Marshal Haig, Sir William Robertson, and Sir John Jellicoe, with whom while I was at the Navy I was brought into the most intimate relations. They have my absolute confidence ; and it is really difficult to under- stand the different trends of thought which have appeared, if you analyse them, for the last fortnight in relation to these men who, morning, noon, and night, go through anxieties which words cannot picture, who are burdened with orders and commands which involve hundreds of thousands of lives, and who see themselves hold up from time to time to the odium of their fellow countrymen as though in some way or other they were betraying their country, if not by their corruption, at least by their incompetence."
This is a very distinct pledge. It means nothing less than that if there should be any attempt inside the Government to substitute somebody else's strategy for the strategy of Sir William Robertson and Sir Douglas Haig, Sir Edward Carson will cease to be a member of the Cabinet. Sir Edward Carson's personal power is, we are sure, so much valued by his fellow-Ministers that any one of them would think several times before taking a course in opposition to the will of Sir William Robertson and Sir Douglas Haig. It would be perfectly well understood that such a course would mean the break-up of the Ministry. We cannot exaggerate the satisfaction we feel in knowing that this pledge is in existence. So long as any member of the Cabinet who has inclinations to stray off into new fields of strategy is kept on the straight path by the forceful person- ality of Sir Edward Carson, we shall be in no danger. There will be no tendency for restless minds to express impatience with Sir Douglas Haig's sure method of wearing down the enemy at the point where the enemy is most easily engaged— that is to say, on the Western Front, where the lines of com- munication between the base and the front are short and wily maintained. Wo have all along felt that people here
do not sufficiently realize the tremendous gruelling to which the German soldiers have been subjected in Flanders. The " Gates of Hell " seems to be, in the German Army, the popular—or in another sense the extremely unpopular— description of the Flanders front. It should not be forgotten that the pick of the German troops are on this front, and there can be no doubt that, though the German newspapers carefully suppress any symptoms of the despair with which the German soldier faces the prospect of being sent to Flanders, the impression of horror and misery which. has been produced on the German mind is already profound and with every month grows deeper. It is easy to talk of " the impenetrable barrier," but so long as the German Army is being continually engaged and gradually worn down, any estimate of the results by geographical measurement is futile. Moreover, for those who have doubting minds the geo- graphical measure seems at the moment to be coming to the rescue after all. Sir Julian Hynes brilliant break through is in many ways the most remarkable thing that has yet hap- pened in this long campaign. It should not be forgotten that even the most dramatic successes of the Germans, like that in Italy for instance, do not disprove the existence of exhaustion in the German Army. The expiring candle always flares up. It may be objected that the recent crisis did not really' implant in the minds of Englishmen any mistrust of the strategy which Sir Douglas Haig and Sir William Robertson have hitherto followed. We wish we could be sure of that, but honestly we believe the contrail. We would ask any one who differs from us to look at the first Letter to the Editor which we publish this week. The inspiration which the writer of that letter drew from Mr. Lloyd George's Paris speech is that the " Western " strategy of our military chiefs has been all wrong. He has used the Paris speech to confirm him in that view. Well, the victory of Sir Julian Byng could not have come at a more appropriate moment. If the nation will accept Sir Edward Carson's motto of " Steady," and in effect inform the Government that it means not only to bo steady itself but to exact steadiness from the Government, all will go well.
In conclusion, we must mention one remarkable and, as it were, detached phenomenon of Sir Edward Carson's speech. We think we are right in saying that he is the first Minister who has publicly denounced Lord Northcliffe. This is a matter of great strangeness and curiosity. Sir Edward Carson was evidently wondering in his mind what the moral or psychological effect of this attack might be upon Lord Northcliffe, for, as he said, Lord Northcliffe is not accustomed to be contradicted. That, we fear, is only too true. It has been plain enough to any observer that what Lord Northcliffe thinks to-day the Government frequently make it their business to think to-morrow. Lord Northcliffe, in truth, is rather in the position of the monarch who is supposed to receive no sort of opinion that has not pasted through the deflecting lenses of his court. Sir Edward Carson did not say that, but preferred to say that Lord Northcliffe preaches from a pulpit where nobody can answer back. It may be said, of course, that Lord Northcliffe and his Press are con- tinually answered back and attacked by the rival Press. But when all has been admitted, Lord Northcliffe through sheer weight of metal, to use a military metaphor, can invariably remain in possession of the field. He ease put down a barrage upon his rivals, and they are soon reduced to sniping from indifferent positions in what the Germans would call the crater area. It is particularly satisfaotory that Sir Edward Carson should have condemned Lord Northcliffe's aatonishing,ly impertinent remark to the effect that Englishmen must look to the United States to run their business for them. Sir Edward Carson has broken the spell, and in one way or another- there may be results.
Previous page
