§ Mr. BURGOYNEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether the hull of Airship No. 1 was accepted from the contractors conditionally; and, if so, will the conditions, if including repair of damage sustained, be enforced; (2) whether any Admiralty representative took exception to the form of girder employed in the construction of Airship No. 1; and whether the design was entirely approved by the Admiralty constructors; (3) whether it is proposed to publish the minutes of the finding of the Court of Inquiry instituted subsequent to the collapse of Airship No. 1; and whether, as a result, there is reason to believe that a successful naval airship cannot be evolved; and (4) whether the contractors informed the Admiralty representatives that Airship No. 1 possessed a factor of safety of 8-inch shear; and whether it was found that the factor in shear was no more than 2½?
§ The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Churchill)It is not proposed to publish the minutes of the Court of Inquiry instituted subsequent to the collapse of Airship No. 1. The Court of Inquiry was held to determine whether, in the opinion of the naval officers forming the Court, blame was attributable to any officers and men in His Majesty's Navy for the disaster, and the duty of the Court was confined entirely to investigation from this point of view. The whole matter is still under consideration by the Board of Admiralty. The firm of builders—Messrs. Vickers—were solely responsible for the structural strength of the vessel. The Admiralty constructors were not, therefore, called upon to express approval or otherwise of the form of girder used.