§ Mr. BELLAIRSasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any other copies of letters from Captain Bacon, R.N., to the First Sea Lord were printed at the taxpayers' expense, in addition to the one officially admitted; and, if so, how many copies were printed in each case?
§ Mr. ASHLEYalso asked whether any other letters written to the First Sea Lord and containing observations on the views of their superior officers, besides that written by Captain Bacon, parts of which have already been published, have been printed for the convenience of Lord Tweed mouth or any other First Lord, or of any one connected with the Admiralty; and
§ Mr. LONSDALEasked whether more than one letter written by Captain Bacon has been printed by authority; and whether he will lay copies of all these letters upon the Table of the House.
§ The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. McKenna)It would be inexpedient and contrary to usual practice to give information with regard to confidential documents.
§ Mr. ASHLEYAre we to understand that documents are confidential which have been printed and circulated outside the Admiralty?
§ Mr. McKENNAYes, Sir; these particular documents are confidential, and many confidential documents are printed. As to the circulation outside the Admiralty, I am unable to give any explanation as to how it came about that any of these documents found their way outside the Admiralty.
§ Mr. ASHLEYDoes the right hon. Gentleman deny that they were sent outside the Admiralty?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have stated already that in regard to the numbers in one case 25 were printed and in the other case 50 were printed. The circulation of these documents outside the Admiralty is a matter quite unknown to me.
§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSDoes the right hon. Gentleman associate himself with the comments regarding an hon. Member of this House contained in the letters?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir. Probably it would be better if supplementary questions on this matter were put to me after the further question on this subject which is down on the Paper has been put.
§ Mr. CHARLES DUNCAN (Barrow-in-Furness)Are we to understand that some-body has stolen these copies?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe whole of this happened years ago, and I am unable to offer any explanation.
§ Mr. SPEAKERWould it not be better to accept the suggestion made by the First Lord of the Admiralty before putting further supplementary questions?
§ Mr. BELLAIRSI desire to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in any communications to the First Sea Lord which have been printed at the taxpayers' expense, Captain Bacon cast any personal or professional reflections on any brother officer on the active or retired lists; whether he could state for what purpose the letter or letters were printed; and whether the Board of Admiralty, as a whole, with due regard to the traditional 385 methods of British naval administration, approve of the printing of such letter or letters and propose to continue the practice?
§ Mr. McKENNAMy hon. Friend is, I understand, in possession of a copy of a private letter addressed by Captain Bacon to the First Sea Lord which was printed for use in the Admiralty, and in which there is an incidental reference to the hon. Member himself. It would certainly have been better if the personal reference had been omitted in the printed copy, as it was solely for the sake of the remainder of its contents that the letter was preserved. The practice of printing informal documents of various kinds is convenient, and the Admiralty do not propose to give up this convenience in all circumstances. As regards the reference now complained of, I desire to express my regret that the hon. Member's feelings should have been hurt by this letter when a copy of it came into his possession.
Captain FABERI would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has read the career of the hon. Member for Lynn Regis, and whether he does not consider it brilliant?
§ Mr. CHARLES CRAIG (Antrim, S.)Seeing that the right hon. Gentleman has described Captain Bacon's letters as private, what explanation can he give of the fact that no less than 50 copies of the letter were printed?
§ Mr. McKENNAI would like to explain the whole of the circumstances because, most unfairly, Captain Bacon's name has been used in a way which implies a charge against him. The only crime, if it be a crime, that he has committed is that he is a very able man who writes remarkably good letters. [Cries of "Oh, oh"] He wrote two perfectly private letters to Sir John Fisher, and he had not the faintest idea that they were going to be printed or made use of in any public way. I have read the two letters, and they are admirable letters, and very long ones, and in the course of these two private letters Captain Bacon makes the personal observation which my hon. Friend very properly complains of. But in a private letter I do not suppose any one of us would deny that on occasions we have mentioned individuals by name—[Cries of "No, no"]—and not always in the most complimentary form. Captain Bacon's letters, without his knowledge, were printed, and the reason for their being printed was that 386 they were remarkably good letters containing, outside the personal reference complained of, a very useful account worthy of being preserved of what has taken place during an eventful period in the history of naval administration. Sir John Fisher had a very great deal of work to do at that time, and when he read these letters he thought they ought to be preserved. He regrets, and nobody regrets it more than himself, that without editing those letters first they were printed for private use. The only complaint is that before those letters were printed the reference to my hon. Friend was not struck out. That is a matter for which he is extremely sorry, and for which I am also extremely sorry. As regards everything else in the letters it was entirely proper that they should be printed, because they were worth preserving. The mere fact of having 50 copies printed was merely giving an order to the printer.
Mr. G. D. FABER (York)May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the 50 copies were not printed because they reflected upon the personal character of the hon. Member opposite?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir. If the hon. Member saw the letter, which is a long one, he would agree with me that it was admirably written. The personal reference to the hon. Member for Lynn Regis was merely one short passage, in a long letter upon many different matters.
§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSIs it not a fact that at the time the hon. Member for Lynn Regis was engaged in this House attacking Sir John Fisher?
§ Mr. McKENNAI could not say without reference to the speeches made by my hon. Friend at the time. The whole incident occurred three years ago.
§ Mr. ASHLEYMay we take it that the right hon. Gentleman disapproves of this incident?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have stated again and again that I disapprove, and Sir John Fisher himself disapproves, of including in any printed document a personal reference to any individual Member of this House. I disapprove of it most strongly, but this letter was never published in any ordinary sense of the word.
§ Mr. McKENNAI do not know that it was marked private, but it was written as a private letter. It was a private letter.
§ Mr. MacNEILLI move, Mr. Speaker, that the Question be now put.
§ Mr. LONSDALEAs 50 copies of this letter have been printed, will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to lay one on the Table of the House?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, sir. It would be most undesirable.
§ Several hon. Members rising—
§ Mr. SPEAKERsaid: Any further questions must be put on the Paper.