Captain FABERasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, with reference to the letter written by Captain Bacon to the First Sea Lord, and the footnote appended thereto, which has recently been made public, why that letter and footnote were published and printed; how many copies were printed; whether it was shown to any officer in the Admiralty or the Fleet; and whether as it has been held officially to have been a perfectly proper letter, similar communications from officers who have been closely associated with the First Sea Lord will be permitted in future?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe letter referred to has not been made public, though parts of it have lately appeared in certain newspapers. The letter was printed as an ordinary and convenient means of record, and for the information of the First Lord at the time, which was three years ago. The letter was not published. Twenty- 1033 five copies of it were printed. I am unable at this interval of time to say precisely who saw it. As the letter in question was a perfectly proper one, similar communications would be unobjectionable.
Captain FABERThen we may take it for granted that this letter was printed only for the information of Lord Tweed-mouth?
§ Mr. McKENNAYes; you may take it for granted that it was printed simply and solely for the purpose of record, and for Lord Tweedmouth's information.
§ Mr. McKENNASeveral copies are kept as records of some letters in the ordinary course, and in the case of an order to the printer it is quite usual to ask for a larger number of copies than are in fact wanted.
§ Mr. McKENNASo far as is known at the Board of Admiralty no record can be found, nor is any information obtainable as to any person to whom the copy was shown. Undoubtedly the copy must have got out somehow, because otherwise Sir George Armstrong could not have seen it, but it could only have been by one of the grossest breaches of confidence, and I hope the House will rest satisfied upon the authority of the whole Board who inquired into this matter that there is no blame attached to Captain Bacon, and that the proceedings of the Board three years ago in this matter were perfectly proper.
§ Mr. ARTHUR LEEIs there any possibility of effecting any economies in printing in matters of this character?
§ Mr. McKENNAI do not know what footnote the hon. Member refers to. I will refer to the letter.
Captain CRAIGAre all the First Sea Lord's letters printed 25 times, or was this a special occasion?
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state by whose instruction and for what purpose 1034 Captain Bacon was directed to report to the Admiralty on the conduct and opinions of his superior officers on matters of Admiralty policy?
§ Mr. McKENNAHe was not so directed and did not do so.
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONDo I understand that no directions were given him?
§ Mr. McKENNAThat would be the interpretation to draw.
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if subordinate officers in the Navy have been making reports about their superior officers analogous to those submitted by Captain Bacon to the First Sea Lord?
§ Mr. McKENNANo such reports have been made.
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONWill they be accepted if they are made?
§ Mr. McKENNAThat depends entirely upon the circumstances of each case.
§ Mr. BELLAIRShad given notice to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty how many copies the Government printers, Eyre and Spottiswoode, printed of the letter to the First Sea Lord from a captain in which reflections were cast on his Commander-in-Chief and another flag-officer serving in the same fleet; and whether he has ascertained how a printed copy of this letter came into the possession of Sir George Armstrong? The hon. Member observed that the first part had been answered, but he should like to have an answer to the latter part.
§ Mr. McKENNATwenty-five copies were printed of the letter referred to, but no such reflections were made in it. It has already been stated that the copy could only have been obtained by Sir George Armstrong by a breach of confidence.
§ Mr. BELLAIRSIs there any reflection on the person who sent it from the Admiralty or upon Sir George Armstrong's publication?
§ Mr. McKENNAYes; I think it is a reflection upon both.