The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1918-02-23

hampeerd In discussing the action
taken at Versailles by resolution
passed at that conference 10y the mill.
tary representatives and the govern.
ments that II was not desirable tc
give any information regarding tn,
general plan arrived at.
Mr.. Lloyd George thought, however
he could make clear where the con.
troverS had arisen and asked for tn,
Judgment OF the house OF the action
OF the government.
The general principle laid down
at Versailles was agreed to whole
heartedly by everybody" nc said
There was no conflict as regarded
the policy. but only as to the method
OF giving effect to 1t. There was
agreement as to the policy; there was
agreement that there must be central
authority to exercise supreme direc.
ton OF that policy; there was agree
ment that authority must be interal.
lied authority. and there was COM
plete agreement that that authority
should have executive power. The
only question that arose was as to
how that central authority should be
constituted. That was the only diff
ference"
IT was the whole issue. and, i'm
my judgment. an agreement was
reached at the conference even In re-
gard to that
The premier proceeded to give the
stages OF the discussions At the con-
ference. Several proposals. ne said.
wcrc put forward and examined very
can fully. Everybody went to the
conference with a full desire to nnd
the best method and not to advocate
any particular proposal
All the other proposals. one after
the other. were rejected until they
cnme to the last. The Hrst was favor
ed in the first instance by the French
and British general staffs He did no:
think that the American and italian
staffs took quite the same view.
The Americans were In favor OF a
proposal by whcih the central body
should he council OF the chiefs OF
staffs The case put forward for II
was that IL was essential that each OF
the representatives should be In most
Intimate touch with his own war Of
nee; he must know about man power
morale and medical equipments ship
ping and foreign Office matters.
Il also was felt that there was Sc
rious constitutional objections to an
llteraflied body coming to a decision.
sTNcting . the British army. The coun-
Gil fully examined and discussed this
proposal and. he added. cit must be
remembered that all the various rep
rssentatives. civil and military. were
there with The exception OF the italian
commander In chief. On examination
the proposal completely broke down
and was rejected as unavoidable.
one OF the reasons for the con-
tinuous sessions at Versailles was not
merely because they had TO make
decisions but because they should be
constantly comprising notes and dis
cussing the situation from day to day
"A council OF the chief OF staff"
said the premier. involved the crea-
ton OF another body. conflicting with
the Versailles council. The moment
we began an examination It became
clear that the functions which the
executive body were to exercise could
not properly be performed by the
chiefs OF staff in various capacities
IL the chiefs OF staff stayed in Paris,
their government would be deprived
for long periods OF the advice of their
principal military advisers. For thai
reason the supreme war council re-
jected the proposal with complete
unanimity.
Il think am right i'm saying that
the proposal was withdrawn. Then 4
was suggested by NJ. CIemenceau that
j. was desirable for US to separate and
for each delegation to think out
plan ofits own, It Is very remarkable
that. meeting separately and consid.
"rlns the matter quite independently
we should have returned the following
morning with exactly the same pro-
posai. And that proposal Is the pro-
posal which now holds the field.
II hesltated for some time whether
I should not read TO the house o
commons the very cognent docu-
inent submitted by the American
delegation. which put the case for
tho present proposal. III IL one of tho