Maurice Debate facts for kids

The Maurice Debate was an important discussion in the British Parliament on 9 May 1918, during World War I. A high-ranking army officer, Major-General Sir Frederick Maurice, claimed that the government's War Cabinet had lied to Parliament. He said they gave wrong information about how many British soldiers were fighting on the Western Front in France.

H. H. Asquith, the leader of the Liberal Party, supported Maurice's claims. He then attacked Prime Minister David Lloyd George, who was also a Liberal. This debate caused a huge split in the Liberal Party. Asquith's attack didn't work well. Lloyd George strongly defended himself, treating the debate like a "vote of confidence." This meant if he lost the vote, he might have to step down as Prime Minister. He convinced Parliament with a powerful speech, even though some of his facts were misleading. The debate didn't start the split in the Liberal Party, but it made it much clearer and harder to fix. The main results were that Lloyd George became stronger, Asquith became weaker, and the public stopped criticizing the war strategy. It also made sure that civilians (the government) had more control over the military.

Why the Debate Happened

Prime Minister David Lloyd George and his team were often frustrated. The army kept giving them unreliable numbers about how many British and German soldiers were available. For example, Maurice Hankey, a top government official, wrote in his diary in December 1917 that the army's figures were "utterly unreliable." He felt they changed their facts to support their arguments. If they wanted more soldiers, they would say they barely had enough to hold the line. If they wanted to attack, they would claim the enemy was weak.

In February 1918, General Sir William Robertson was removed from his job as the head of the army. This happened after many months of arguments with the government. They disagreed about how many soldiers were needed and where they should be sent. Some people suspected Robertson was trying to get back into power.

Soon after Robertson left, Germany launched a massive attack on 21 March 1918. This attack, called the German Spring Offensive, almost led to a huge defeat for the British army. As British forces were still struggling in April, people started debating why this near-disaster happened. Lloyd George believed that Field Marshal Haig had wasted British soldiers in attacks during 1916–17. However, the military and their supporters felt the government had not given enough men to the British army.

On 9 April 1918, Lloyd George gave a speech in Parliament. He used official figures to say that the British army in France was stronger on 1 January 1918 than it was a year before. He also said there was only one "white" (British) division in Mesopotamia and three in Egypt and Palestine. He claimed the rest were Indian divisions with only a few British troops.

Major-General Maurice was a supporter of Robertson. He was nearing the end of his time as Director of Military Operations (DMO). He visited Haig's headquarters in France. There, he heard that officers were unhappy with Lloyd George's speech.

On 18 April, a Member of Parliament (MP) asked if Lloyd George's figures included non-combatants. These were people like laborers, many from India, China, or South Africa. They built roads, railways, and moved heavy equipment. Ian Macpherson, a War Office official, replied using figures from Maurice's department.

Then, on 22 April, a weekly report from the same department said that Germany had 330,000 more riflemen than Britain at the start of the year. Lloyd George was furious. This contradicted his own figures from 9 April. He wrote an angry letter to Lord Milner, the Secretary of State for War. He called the figures "extraordinarily slipshod."

On 23 April, MPs asked questions about how thin Gough's army was. This was after they took over a section of the French line. Bonar Law, the Conservative leader, replied that Haig and Philippe Pétain (the French commander) had agreed to the extension themselves. This was not entirely true.

Maurice's Letter to the Public

Maurice met with Robertson on 29 April. It seems Robertson suggested Maurice write to Henry Wilson, the new head of the army. If that didn't work, he suggested writing to the newspapers. Robertson encouraged Maurice to write the letter, but he didn't openly support him. This made Lloyd George's biographer, John Grigg, say that Robertson looked the worst in this situation. There is little proof that a bigger plot existed to bring down the government.

Maurice wrote to Wilson on 30 April, but Wilson did not reply. Maurice then wrote his letter to the press on 2 May, but he didn't send it yet. Robertson wrote to him on 4 May, telling him to be very careful to get his facts right. He added, "You are contemplating a great thing – to your undying credit."

Maurice wrote to Asquith on 6 May. He said he decided not to meet him because he wanted to take full responsibility for the letter himself.

What Maurice Claimed

Maurice's letter appeared in The Times and other newspapers on 7 May. In his letter, Maurice claimed that government ministers had given false information to Parliament. He said they lied about the number of British troops on the Western Front. He believed they did this to hide the fact that troop numbers had been reduced. This reduction happened because Lloyd George decided to send more soldiers to Palestine, against military advice. Maurice accused both Bonar Law and Lloyd George of misleading Parliament.

Maurice specifically challenged statements made by Lloyd George on 9 April. First, Lloyd George had said that despite many losses in 1917, the army in France was stronger on 1 January 1918 than on 1 January 1917. Second, Lloyd George claimed there were very few British troops compared to Indian troops in Egypt and Palestine. Maurice also challenged Bonar Law's statement from 23 April. Law had said that the extension of the British Front before the battle on 21 March was only arranged by military leaders.

The government's statements suggested that British forces on the Western Front were strong enough. This implied that the near-defeat by Germany in March was the fault of the army's headquarters. Maurice wrote that his letter was "not the result of a military conspiracy." He also said it had "been seen by no soldier," which was not entirely true since he had spoken with Robertson. He stated that his duty as a citizen was more important than his duty as a soldier.

How People Reacted

On the morning Maurice's letter was published, Wilson told the War Cabinet that he had "heard from Maurice." However, he did not mention the letter's contents. To make the numbers even more confusing, the War Office provided yet another set of figures on 7-8 May. These new figures showed that the British army was only 100,000 combatants weaker than the German forces. Annoyingly for Lloyd George, these figures counted artillerymen, machine gunners, and tank crews as non-combatants.

Asquith asked for a special question in Parliament. Bonar Law, for the government, offered to set up a "Court of Honour" with two judges to investigate. Asquith could have chosen the judges, but he felt this offer disrespected Parliament's independence. He refused the offer on 7 May. Instead, Asquith demanded a Select Committee (a group of MPs to investigate) to look into the claims. He also pushed for a full debate in Parliament.

On 8 May 1918, Howell Arthur Gwynne, the editor of The Morning Post, wrote to Asquith. He admitted he was a long-time political enemy of Asquith. But he said it was important for the country that Asquith become Prime Minister again instead of Lloyd George.

The letter caused serious concern in the newspapers. People worried about the correct number of soldiers on the Western Front and whether MPs had been misled. However, on 8 May, The Times newspaper criticized Maurice's letter. They said his claims, like "seen by no soldier" (when he had talked to Robertson), were like the "dishonest Parliamentary answers" Maurice complained about.

Asquith's pride and anger at being replaced as Prime Minister by Lloyd George in 1916 made it hard for him to stay out of the fight. His wife and political friends also encouraged him. However, he knew he didn't have the strong desire to fight, and others didn't really want him back as Prime Minister.

The Big Debate

On the morning of 9 May, The Times reported a speech by G. H. Roberts, the Minister of Labour. He complained about constant "sniping" (criticism) at the government. Lloyd George would use this same word later in his own speech.

Asquith began speaking around 3:45 pm. His speech was seen as dry, formal, and overly detailed. He focused on explaining why he wanted a select committee. He insisted he was not trying to remove the government. When someone shouted that a select committee had not worked for the Marconi scandal, he had no answer. At one point, he asked, "What is the alternative?" As he paused, Charles Stanton, an MP who supported the war, shouted, "Get on with the war!" This brought cheers and laughter. Even Asquith's friends saw that he had lost his fighting spirit. They knew he would not be a good wartime Prime Minister.

Lloyd George correctly guessed that General Robertson had largely stirred up the whole affair. He also felt that Asquith had lost the will to lead. Lloyd George had his assistant, Hankey, prepare notes for him. He used the War Office figures from 18 April, not the later figures from Maurice's department. Lloyd George spoke for an hour and a quarter, twice as long as Asquith. He was direct and aggressive. He treated the issue as a "vote of confidence" in his government. He strongly denied Maurice's accusations in a powerful speech, even though it was based on questionable information. He pointed out that Asquith had not set up a select committee for the terrible Kut Campaign. Instead, Asquith had set up an independent inquiry.

Lloyd George attacked Maurice, saying his letter broke the army's rules. Lloyd George noted that the figures the government presented on 18 April, showing an increase in British "combatants," technically came from Maurice's department. He admitted that Maurice had not actually seen the 18 April figures (he was away). But he said a deputy had approved them. Lloyd George also said that Maurice was present at a Cabinet meeting where the figure of three "white" divisions in Egypt/Palestine was given. Furthermore, he argued that Maurice's statement about being at Versailles when the British line extension was agreed was misleading. Maurice was in Versailles, but not at the Supreme War Council, and the issue had already been agreed between Haig and Pétain.

Lloyd George also reminded MPs that the debate could bring down the government and put Asquith back in power. He urged them to "Make no mistake!" People felt that Lloyd George had completely disproved Maurice's claims. One person, Dingle Foot, said that "at the time it appeared that Lloyd George had completely routed his critics."

Hankey listened to Lloyd George's "superb parliamentary effort." However, he thought it was "not the speech of a man who tells 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'." He noted that Lloyd George was "discreetly silent" about the figures from 22 April. These figures did not show an increase in the British army's combat strength. Hankey was asked by MPs to tell them the real truth, but he publicly supported the Prime Minister.

Among other important speeches was one by Edward Carson. He had recently left the government. Carson had tried to convince Conservative MPs to support neither Lloyd George nor Asquith. But they decided to back the government rather than see Asquith return or have an election. In his speech, Carson said that Parliament must either support or bring down the government, and supporting it was better. He supported the government.

By this time, other speakers were interrupted by shouts of "Divide! Divide!" as MPs wanted to vote. Many MPs were away serving in the forces, so less than half of the House actually supported the government. However, Parliament did not want to remove the government. In the vote, the House of Commons supported the government by 295 votes to 108.

One historian of the Liberal Party noted that this was a larger majority than expected. 98 Liberal MPs supported Asquith's motion, while 70 Liberal MPs supported Lloyd George's government. 93 Liberal MPs either did not vote or were absent. Labour MPs were also divided. 15 supported the government, eight supported Asquith, and 12 were absent or did not vote.

Were Maurice's Claims True?

After the debate, Lloyd George told George Younger that he had been "caught out telling the truth." Lloyd George chose to ignore any figures provided after 18 April. As Hankey said, he was "discreetly silent" about the figures from 22 April (or 7–8 May). Lord Milner later suggested that Lloyd George should correct the 18 April figures, but he didn't push the point. This suggestion made Lloyd George lose some confidence in Milner as War Secretary.

Lloyd George's figure of 3 "white" divisions in Egypt/Palestine had been given honestly at the time. But Henry Wilson had since told him that the correct number was actually seven. Some of these were later moved to the Western Front after the German attack began.

Bonar Law said on 23 April that the extension of the British line had already been agreed between Haig and Pétain. He also said that "this particular matter" had not been discussed at Versailles. Maurice, in his letter, said he was at Versailles when the matter had been discussed. In reality, the extension of the line was agreed in principle by Lloyd George and the French Prime Minister in September 1917. Haig then reluctantly agreed to the details with Pétain in October. However, the French then put more pressure on the British to take over even more of the line. This displeased both Lloyd George and Haig. The issue was sent to the Supreme War Council at Versailles. They recommended that the British army take over about half of what the French wanted. In the end, Pétain did not push the matter further. It is not clear if Law was deliberately avoiding the truth.

What Happened After the Debate

Major-General Maurice was put on half-pay on 11 May, meaning he received half his salary. He soon retired from the Army. However, he was not disgraced. He quickly became a military writer for the Daily Chronicle. He later had a successful career as an author and lecturer in military history. He was never officially cleared of the charges. In his memoirs in the mid-1930s, Lloyd George was harsh about Maurice. He did not admit to his own misleading use of statistics in the debate.

The military writer Repington also suffered because of the affair. He had angered Milner's supporters by attacking him. On 12 May, The Observer newspaper published a two-page article criticizing him. His reputation never fully recovered.

The Times newspaper reported that the debate showed there was an organized opposition group. This was not the first time Liberals had voted against the government. But it was the first time Asquith had openly led the opposition. Ideas about making the Coalition Liberals a separate party group began to form. Separate local organizations for Lloyd George's Liberal supporters started to appear. In the summer of 1918, there were talks between Lloyd George's chief political organizer and Conservatives. They were ready to promise support for 150 Liberal MPs in the next general election. This led to the "coalition coupon" and the official split in the Liberal Party. This split became clear in the 1918 general election.

On 29 October 1918, with the general election coming soon, Lloyd George claimed that the Maurice Debate decided which of the 159 Liberals received coalition "coupons." However, research has shown this was not entirely true. Lloyd George also spoke a lot about the Maurice Debate in a speech on 23 November 1918.

The Maurice debate may not have been the only reason some Liberals got or didn't get the "coupon." But it certainly made the personal disagreement between Lloyd George and Asquith much deeper. The lack of unity in the Liberal Party was clear for everyone to see. This greatly hurt the party in elections. By the 1924 general election, the Liberal Party had only 40 seats in Parliament. It was never again able to form a government on its own.

See also

• History of the Liberal Party (UK)
• Douglas Haig, 1st Earl Haig
• Biography of Maurice at Spartacus Educational