'Summary of Papers Dealing with the Transfer of the Control of the Operations in Mesopotamia from the India Office to the War Office' [‎2v] (4/18)

2
i
» Serial No. 3.
t Serial f o. 4.
J Seiial No. !•
§ Serial No. 5*
)|Serial No- 6.
were fundamentally sound and that it need not be anticipated that the contrO
to be exercised by the War Office would be extended to minor matters He
pointed out that the major control of the campaign was even then exercised in
London and that it wou d be well worth while to surrender the control that we
did exercise, even it it proved more real than nominal, for the adyantages such
surrender would ensure. He concurred in the view of the Secretary of State tha^
the result would be more efficient co-peration and better support from home and
stated that this was already evidenced in the arrangements for the despatcti ot
the nth Division from Egypt. There were a few points which wo uld i
remarked, require further elucidation and possibly amendment, such as the
authority to make higher appointments, the effect on the politick control
exercised by the Viceroy in Persia and the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. , the retention y
the Government ot India of the right to alter or suppress War Office communi
ques and the preservation of the status quo in the matter of the interchange ot
intelligence likely to affect operations. His Excellency also drew attention to
the fact that the new procedure might lead to some weakening of the financial
control of the Government of India as the orders received from home, and which
would be binding on him, might involve expenditure. This danger was not,
however, a serious one, as in the main the class of expenditure referred to would,
under existing agreements, tall on the Treasury and not on India.
In a private telegram* dated the 9th February, H. E. the Viceroy assured
the Secretary of State of the whole-hearted support of the Government cf
India but at'the same time called attention to the points brought to notice by
H. E. the Commander-in-Chief in India. In his telegraphic replyt of the 10th
February the Secretary of State intimated that, m order to meet the various
points raised he had agreed with the Chief ot the Imperial General Staff to
(a) Omit recommendations as to higher appointments in section 3 _ of the
procedure communicated in his telegram; of the 3rd February, and to insert a
new section numbered 3 (a) after (3) as follows :
" The General Officer Commanding in Mesopotamia will make recommenda
tions for higher appointments to the Commander-in-Chief in India and will repeat
them to the Chief of the Imperial General Staff. The appointments will be made
by tne Commander-in-Chief in India subject to the approval of His Majesty s
Government. ,
The higher appointments referred to are those down to Divisional Com-
manders inclusive and also Senior General Staff Officer.
The object of this clause was to secure that^ the Chief of the ^penal
General Staff should be consulted in regard to higher appointments and tha
Government would intervene only in case of a difference arising between him and
the Commander-in-Chief in India. ^
(b) Insert in section 5 after the words ^ security of India " the words " or
the political situation in Persia or the Gulf.
■ The rieht to alter or suppress War Office communiques was conceded, and
,h. reciprocity of the arrangement for the communication of intelligence
admitted. The Secretary of State at the same time ordered that the new
arrangements should be brought into force at once.
The orders of the Secretary of State were given effect to in Army Depart
ment letter to the Chief of the General Staff, No. dated thel6th
February iql6 a copy of which was communicated to all Departments of t e
bebruary 1910, a copy Branc hes of Army Headquarters, the Financial
AdvtseTMilitary Finance, the Military Secretary to His Excellency the Viceroy,
fbt Direcwr -General, Indian Medical Service, the Directoi-General, Posts and
TpWranhs the Director Royal Indian Marine, the Military Accountant J e " ea '
• tbe Central War Controller, and the Deputy Field Accountant General Force
" D," and in a telegramU dated the 23rd idem, the Secretary ot State was inform
ed accordingly.
Subsequent discussions arose as to the exact meaning of clauses 4 and 5
of the revised procedure and its effect on the position ot the- Secreta y, y
"ifP* 1