HC Deb 04 July 1881 vol 262 cc1942-3
MR. PULESTON

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, his attention having been called to the case of Lieutenant Deacon, Whether he can, in view of the facts and circumstances which have transpired, give favourable consideration to the application which has been made to have the sentence reconsidered?

MR. TREVELYAN

To this case, which is of an extremely painful nature, I may say that every member of the Board has given long and anxious consideration. Lieutenant Deacon was tried by a court martial consisting of three captains and two commanders, with the assistance of the Deputy Judge Advocate of the Fleet. Four officers who were present on the occasion—all messmates of his own—were examined—the commander, two lieutenants, and the surgeon. I will give the question and answer in each case:—"Was the prisoner drunk or sober at that dinner?" "The prisoner was drunk." In the next case:—"Was he drunk or sober at that dinner?" "I consider he was drunk." In the next case:—" Was the prisoner drunk or sober at dinner?" "Drunk." The surgeon was asked the same question—" Was he drunk or sober at that dinner?" "Drunk." The prisoner, who was defended, and skilfully defended, by counsel, did not call any officer who was present at table on the occasion in question, nor did he call any evidence as to previous character from former commanders. When the records of Lieutenant Deacon's service were looked up at the Admiralty, it was found that unfavourable reports had been made about him from two previous ships, which had a marked bearing on the case, and six years—not, as has been stated in the public Press, 12 years—ago he Lad been dismissed his ship for sleeping on watch. In the judgment of the Admiralty it would have been impossible to have employed Lieutenant Deacon again; and to retain him in the Service would have been to keep him as an annuitant on the public for life. For my own part, I never arrived at a conclusion with greater regret, or with greater certainty that the conclusion was a right one.

MR. PULESTON

asked whether the evidence was not conflicting?

MR. TREVELYAN

replied, that the evidence of the officers present at the table was not conflicting, though the prisoner's servant and one or two Marines had stated that, in their opinion, he was not drunk.