The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-12-30
ROWLING FOR sCAPEGOATs.
Britons Want to Martyr Officers for
Blunders in South Africa.

BlunQerS IN south A1r1cn.
LONDON, Dec. 29-Miserable rain, fog
and dirt made Christmas week of evil
memory for London. Depressing gloom in
thorough harmony with the weather settled
over the country. The coasts were strewn
with wrecks. commerce was out of joint
and the public was bitterly digesting the
crit tcism of the British army. The demand
for Major General Sir Henry Z. Colvilps
resignation, thrown as a sop. only served to
whet the ravenous appetites of those who
are bowling for the responsibility of the
reverses in South Africa being brought
home to individuals. More heads are de-
manded. Where so many must be blamed
it is felt the selection of General Colville
is woefully inadequate If not unfair. In
deed, it is already said that had not the
Yeomanry force at Lindley, which Colville
failed TO relieve, included some of the
nobility and other influential persons, Col
VILE would never have been recalled. The
bitterness felt by these Yeomanry at be-
ing compelled to surrender because, as
they aIlege, Colville refused to render the
aid within his power, has never died out
and ii will probably result i'm one of the
most interesting court-martials in the an
nails of the British army, upon the result
of which will depend the fate of several
other high officers who have proved un-
equal to the occasion.
Colyille arrived at Plymouth to-day to
demand trial by court-martial to establish
responsibility for the Yecmanry disaster at
Iindley last May. He has made a counter
strike at the War Office in 3000-word
statement. which he has given to the press
He says he has come home to demand
free inquiry and does not intend to be made
a scapegoat for the sake of the staff He
AYERS that the Lindley disaster could never
have happened had he been informed of
Lord Roberts's intentions. The primary
cause of the surrender, he says, was the
insufficient information given by the head
quarters staff to Col. Spragge and himself
and he declines TO accept the blame He
LAYS out the facts and blames others. Gen.
Colville and his influential friends in and
ont of the army ara thus beginning a cam
pajon against the new secretary of state
for war Mr.. William st. john Broderick,
Lord Roberts and Gen. Kitchener. 1t is
expected to be fOugnt out with some ferO-
city in Parliament.
When he returned from South Africa
General Coville says no fully acquainted
the War Office with the facts. After some
time he was informed by. General Sir Ev-
eiyn Wood, the adjutant general. that Lord
I.ansdowne, then secretary of state for war
had directed him to say that General Lord
Wolscley, the commander-ln-chief, APP
proyed of General Colville's resuming his
Gibraltar command. He learned unofiicially
that an aruiy,board of five of the highest
officers of the War Office had considered his
statements and Lord Roberts's dispatches
on the subject. His reappointment was the
esult of the inquiry. To his intense sur
prise Adjutant General Wood. on Dec o..
notified him that William ST. John Brod-
rick, the newly appointed secretary of state
for war held him responsible for the loss
of the Yeomanry and ordered him to quit
his command Immediately and hand over
his resignation.
General Colville. going into Official de-
tails. says he was ordered to concentrate
his division at Hebron on May - and
names the various dispositions OF the other
divisions which extended across the
Orange Free State. He assumed that Lord
Roberts intended 10 advance, sweeping all
Before him. His orders were absolute and
he had TO carry them out. Hence he could
not go to the relief of the 500 Yeomanry
without risking the success of the grand
operation. Under any circumstances. he
says, he considered 1t his duty to push on.
even Is he were sure It would entail the