§ MR. BELLAIRSI beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state why the Return of Fleets this year classes the "Blake" and "Blenheim" as first-class cruisers, seeing that they have been converted to the duties of mother-ships for destroyers and deprived of all but four 6-inch guns and four 12-pounder guns in their armaments, and have an armament inferior to many foreign third class cruisers.
§ MR. MCKENNAAs these vessels retained an integral portion of their original armament, it was decided to leave them in the Return.
§ MR. BELLAIRSThe right hon. Gentleman has not said why they were included in the Return of first-class cruisers. Cannot he create a precedent and degrade them to the third class?
§ MR. MCKENNAI shall be happy to discuss the point on a suitable occasion.
§ EARL WINTERTON (Sussex, Horsham)Could these ships properly be described as first-class cruisers?
§ MR. MCKENNAYes, and they are properly included and described in the Return as first-class cruisers.
§ *MR. GRETTON (Rutland)Do the Admiralty consider that the armament these ships at present carry is the armament of a first-class cruiser?
§ MR. MCKENNANot the ordinary armament—but nevertheless they may properly be retained among first class cruisers for the reason I have stated, i.e., that they possess an integral part of their original armament.