§ Mr. BURGOYNEasked whether provisional dates have yet been fixed for the launch of the capital ships "King George V.," "Centurion," "Audacious," "Ajax," and "Queen Mary?"
§ Mr. McKENNAThe actual dates have not yet been fixed, but it is expected that the ships will be launched in the following months:—
| "King George V." | … | October, 1911. |
| "Centurion" | … | November, 1911. |
| "Ajax" | … | December, 1911. |
| "Audacious" | … | January, 1912. |
| "Queen Mary" | … | February, 1912. |
§ Mr. FALLEMay I ask whether the "Queen Mary" is called after Queen Mary, in which case the nickname of the sailors on board the ship will be easily guessed, or is it after the gracious Consort of his present Majesty?
§ Mr. BURGOYNEasked whether it is intended to strengthen the anti-torpedocraft armament of the battleship "Dreadnought" during her present refit; and whether, in the armoured units at present under construction, a gun of a larger calibre than four inches will be included in the minor battery?
§ Mr. McKENNAThere is no intention of altering the anti-torpedo boat armament of the "Dreadnought" during her present re-fit. It is not desirable in the public interest to furnish the information asked for in the latter part of the question.
§ Mr. ASHLEYasked on what date the Vice-Admiral commanding the Third and Fourth Divisions of the Home Fleet was appointed to that command; in what ship was his flag first hoisted when taking over the appointment; and in what vessels, and of what classes, has his flag since been flown?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe reply to the first part of the question is 24th March, 1911. The flag was first hoisted in the "Cæsar" and, as is customary, transferred to another ship on the following day, 25th March, namely, to the "Bulwark." The flag has since been flown in the battleship "Irresistible," the scout "Forward, battleship "Africa," protected cruiser "Juno," the armoured cruiser "Hogue." The flag has been shifted as necessary when the ships in the Nore command have been sent to sea in rotation for various exercises.
§ Mr. ASHLEYIs this sort of travelling about in the fleet usual with the Admiral?
§ Mr. McKENNAIt is not only usual but necessary. Each ship is sent in its turn to carry out the necessary exercises, and if the Commander-in-Chief is not taking part in the exercises he must transfer his flag to another ship. It is the usual and necessary practice which is followed.
§ Mr. BURGOYNEAre we to understand that the Commander-in-Chief goes out in more than one ship at a time?
§ Mr. McKENNAIt is just the reverse. When the ship which was up to that time the flagship of the Commander-in-Chief goes out to undertake the necessary exercises, the Commander-in-Chief does 1050 not himself go but transfers his flag to another ship.
§ Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, if a man serves his time for pension as a chief armourer, he receives Os. 3d. a day, including badges, and if he takes on another five more years 6s. 9d. a day, while if he is selected for warrant rank he can only get 6s. 3d. a day; whether this inequality prevails in the other ratings in the Royal Navy; and will he consider the advisability of at least securing to the warrant officer the same pay as he received as chief armourer?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe maximum rate of pay and badge pay for a chief armourer is 6s 3d, a day. If allowed to re-engage after completing time for pension, an addition of 6d. a day is allowed in exceptional cases. The rate of pay for a warrant armourer on promotion is Os. 6d. a clay. The matter is now under the consideration of the Board.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the. First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the services of hired boys or boy writers who remain in the dockyard as men are counted from sixteen years of age, whereas the service of ex-dockyard apprentices do not begin until they have completed their apprenticeship, that is from twenty to twenty-two years of age; that when the late Lord Tweedmouth was First Lord of the Admiralty he promised that a uniform method should be adopted governing all classes; and whether, in view of the dissatisfaction prevailing owing to this promise not being carried into effect, he will consider the possibility of taking some steps to remedy the inequality?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I am not aware of any such promise as is alleged in the second part of the question. The Admiralty have, however, long been of opinion that the matter is fully deserving of consideration, and it is at the present moment under review in connection with the petitions presented from the Royal dockyards.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEMay I ask if the right hon. Gentleman will kindly took at Lord Tweedmouth's memorandum on that point?
§ Mr. McKENNAYes; I do not know whether the hon. Member wishes me to 1051 look at it again, but I should have thought he would have inferred from the reply which has been given that it has been looked up.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEI did infer it.