HC Deb 04 March 1901 vol 90 cc366-8
MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been directed to the concluding paragraph in Lieut.-General Kelly-Kenny's Report to Lord Roberts, dated 20th February, 1900, on the operations at Paardeberg; whether, as a matter of fact, Lord Kitchener did direct the operations at Paardeberg Drift on the 18th February by suggestions to General Kelly-Kenny; and who is held responsible by the War Office and the Commander-in-Chief for the conduct of those operations.


Yes, Sir. I had that paragraph in my mind in the answers I gave last week, and I have nothing to add to them. General Kelly-Kenny is directly responsible for these operations, but the Commander-in-Chief takes full responsibility for what occurred.


Is the right lion. Gentleman aware that, according to the statement of The Times correspondent, General Kelly-Kenny telegraphed to Lord Roberts and received a reply from Lord Roberts to the effect that if more than one brigade were engaged Lord Kitchener was in command and he must take his orders from him?


I have explained the exact position of General Kelly-Kenny and I have nothing to add. Lord Kitchener was empowered by Lord Roberts to offer advice. He thought fit to do so from time to time, and General Kelly-Kenny accepted the advice.