§ MR. NORMANI beg to ask the Secretary of State fox War whether he has made inquiry into the circumstances under which Lord Kitchener described as without foundation a despatch of Reuter's correspondent in South Africa which Lord Kitchener now admits to have been accurate with the exception of the name of the Boer officer commanding and whether, if his inquiries show that no blame attaches to Reuter's correspondent in the matter, he will cause some official expression of regret to be conveyed to him for the charge inadvertently made against him.
§ MR. BRODRICKI will read out the telegrams despatched to, and received from, Lord Kitchener on this matter:—
§ From the Secretary of State for War to Lord Kitchener.
§ War Office, 8th June, 1901.
§ Is there any truth in discomfiture of Beyer's commando reported in press?
§ From Lord Kitchener to the Secretary of State for War.
§ Pretoria, 9th June, 1901.
§ Referring to your telegram 8th June, re Beyer's, no truth in report.
§ From the Secretary of State for War to Lord Kitchener.
§ War Office, 10th June, 1901.
§ Reuter's correspondent has seriously misled the public respecting Beyer's defeat. What steps do you propose to take?
§ From Lord Kitchener to the Secretary of State for War.
§ Pretoria, 1lth June, 1901.
§ I have warned Press Censor to be more careful. I think it would be as well if you 74 would publish fact that we are not responsible in any way for correctness of correspondent's news. Many misleading telegrams are sent from different parts of the country that do injure military operations, but are distinctly inaccurate.
§ In consequence of recent mail letters received, however, it is suggested that an action did take place which was in favour of the Boers on that date, but it did not relate to Beyer's commando. I telegraphed on the 10th asking whether there was any truth in that suggestion. I have not yet received Lord Kitchener's reply.
§ MR. NORMANThe point is whether Reuter's correspondent sent a message which was without foundation or not.
§ MR. BRODRICKI do not think that the hon. Member would be justified in reading anything into my reply. My reply is that I am at present under the impression that there was no special action which Lord Kitchener thought it worth while to report on that date. If that be so, then the correspondent is in error; but if there was an action in which the Boers suffered heavily on that date there would be some foundation for the belief in the correspondent's report, and that it was only a difference in the name of the Boer commander which was wrong.