APPOINTMENT OF NEW SEA LORDS. (Hansard, 28 November 1911)

§ Lord ALEXANDER THYNNE
I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty a question of which I have given him private notice, whether it is the fact that three Sea Lords of the Admiralty have resigned, and what was the reason of their resignation, and whether he is in a position to name their successors? I feel I owe an apology for raising a question of this magnitude at such a late hour. My reason for doing so is the vital importance that this question bears on the defences of the country, and I feel the House is entitled to have an immediate statement, if this rumour is correct, of the reasons which have led to this very sweeping change in the administration of the Admiralty. I think it is unprecedented, the resignation of three Sea Lords, in the history of the Admiralty. I think also that the House is entitled to be apprised of the full particulars before any communication is made to the Press.

§ The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Churchill)
I do not at all complain that the Noble Lord should have asked at the first available Parliamentary opportunity for information upon what he very justly described as a most important matter. It is quite true that His Majesty has been pleased to approve of certain changes in the Board of Admiralty which have been announced this evening—[An HON. MEMBER: "Where?"]—in the regular manner and in the way that all Admiralty appointments, War Office appointments, and Ministerial appointments are invaribly announced. Sir Arthur Wilson, the First Sea Lord, was due in any case to retire in March, on attaining seventy years of age, and Admiral Madden was due in any case to retire on 5th January, on the completion of the tenure of his post at the Admiralty and on appointment to a seagoing command. So that the situation I had to face was that the Board of Admiralty would be changed to the extent of half its number so far as the naval members 360 are concerned, including by far the most important member, the First Sea Lord, early next year—that is to say, during the period when the Estimates are under discussion in the House of Commons, and when much of the most important work of the year is in full transaction.
At the present time, during the months of November, December, and January, the issues are open, and decisions have to be taken which will govern Admiralty policy and finance for the next two years. As the House knows, we make this year the situation of two years hence, and we present this year the results of the decisions taken two years ago. Having regard to the changes which would come necessarily in the beginning of the new year, I came to the conclusion, after very careful consideration and discussion with the Prime Minister and others of my colleagues, that it would be better in the interests of the public service and of the Navy that the changes should take place now, and that the new men should assume their offices at a time when they will have a perfecty free hand to decide upon the issues which otherwise would have been stereotyped for them, and over which they would have had very little effective control. I therefore advised His Majesty to assent to some important appointments in the Board of Admiralty and certain consequential appointments in the commands of the fleet. No difference of opinion of any kind, no difference, personal or public, has arisen. No question of policy of any sort has arisen. It has merely been that it would be better to make the changes now and make them all at once than to make them a few months hence gradually, when some of the questions on which the new Sea Lords ought to have an opportunity of deciding would have been necessarily prejudiced by the passage of time.
The new First Sea Lord will be Sir Francis Bridgeman, who comes from the command of the Home Fleet with a record and reputation for sea-going service which I am certain are unequalled in the Navy. The Second Sea Lord is Prince Louis of Battenberg. I think it is not necessary for me to enlarge to the House—which is so well-informed on naval affairs — on the capacity of this brilliant officer. The Third Sea Lord is Admiral Briggs, controller, who has been a year in office, and has now obtained a mastery of the extremely intricate and extensive work of his great department. He will remain as a link 361 between the old Board and the new. The Fourth Sea Lord is Admiral Madden, who was due on January 5th to take up a seagoing command in the Home Fleet. It is satisfactory, I think, that he should be replaced by Captain Pakenham, an Officer who has the rare distinction of having been on Admiral Togo's flagship during the whole of the Russo-Japanese war, and having been present at the battle of Tsushima, one of the few great naval actions of modern times.
I think I may say to the House that the appointment of these naval officers will command the wholehearted confidence of the fleet. New appointments have necessitated certain changes in the commands of the fleet which are vacated by them. The Home Fleet will therefore pass into the charge of Sir George Callaghan, who has already been in charge of it during a long period in the present year, when Sir Francis Bridgeman was laid up. The Second in Command will be Sir John Jellicoe, an officer who was late controller of the Admiralty, and whose future in the command of the fleet is assured in the opinion of many of the very best judges on naval matters. The Atlantic Fleet, which Sir John Jellicoe resigns, will be taken by the Admiral in command of the Fifth Cruiser Squadron, Admiral Burney, and the command of that squadron will be assumed by Admiral Sturdee, who was, I believe, in recent times the Chief of Staff of the Noble Lord the Member for Portsmouth. That is the distribution and redistribution of the important commands, which, I trust, the House will believe has been undertaken for no other reason than to secure the best service for the Crown and for the State, which the needs of the times require. I should just like to say this, as the matter has been raised, that no difference of any sort has occurred at all. I should further like to say that the charges which have been made, and which have slightly anticipated the regular and normal working of events, imply no slur or reproach upon any member of the outgoing Board. I should be quite prepared, should the necessity arise—I trust it will not—to show that any rumours or statements which have been made as to the position or disposition of the fleet are wholly without basis in so far as they suggest that absolute security has not at all times been maintained. I should like, as I have been called upon to make some remarks to the House, to place on record the great sense 362 which the House and the country ought to have of the services that Sir Arthur Wilson has rendered, both to the Navy and to the State, and which have gained him universal respect from all who have had the good fortune to serve under him, or have had the honour to be associated with him in the Service.

§ Lord A. THYNNE
Arising out of the right hon. Gentleman's statement, I hope he will see his way to answer two portions of my question which he has not dealt with, namely, the reason of Sir George Egerton's resignation and the date on which his appointment would normally expire. I hope he will deal with that, and secondly, whether these three Sea Lords resigned on their own initiative or whether they have been removed from their appointments. The third question is whether there is any precedent at all for trying to synchronise the appointment of the Sea Lords of the Admiralty. For after all this is no new situation—the appointment of new Sea Lords at the beginning of the year. These questions have arisen in the past, and the same difficulties have been met by previous First Lords without attempting to synchronise the removal of officers from their posts.

§ Mr. CHURCHILL
I can only speak again by leave of the House. In the changes which have been made I have, of course, had to consider the constitution of the Board as a whole, and it was in the interests of the formation of the Board as a whole that I informed Sir George Egerton that His Majesty had approved these changes in the Board of Admiralty. Sir George Egerton will be appointed—I have obtained His Majesty's sanction for this—to the command-in-chief of an important home port on the first vacancy which occurs, and, as I have said, no reproach or slur of any kind rests upon his professional reputation. The change is necessary to produce a Board which is completely unified, and which, considered as a whole, will be the most effective working machine in the interest of general administrative efficiency. That and no other reason has operated. As to precedents, the House may be perfectly sure that precedent has been strictly observed, and that nothing has been done which is not in accordance with the regular custom and administration of the country. As to the Noble Lord's question whether the Sea Lords have resigned or whether they were removed, I think the procedure followed 363 is perfectly regular, and when I apprised them of the fact that His Majesty had given his assent to certain changes in the Board of Admiralty they naturally accepted those changes in the true spirit of the Naval Service, which is not to push personal pretensions, but to offer the fullest personal service wherever and however that may be needed in the general interests of the State.