§ 9. Mr. HOUSTONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is in a position to make a statement giving a full and accurate report of the German destroyer raid on the night of Thursday, 23rd-24th November; whether in the opinion of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty and their staff the said raid had for its objective the sinking of British, Allied, and neutral ships in the Downs so that this important and necessary passage and shelter should be blocked and rendered useless, or whether the object of the raid was merely a bombardment of one or more of the south-east coast ports and towns between Dover and Ramsgate, inclusive, and, if so, which; whether he made an after-dinner speech at a banquet on 9th November wherein, referring to the Channel raid of 26th-27th October, he said, but it can be repeated, and my confident hope is that if it is we shall be able to show that if destroyers can enter the Channel on a night which they choose, and under circumstances in which visibility beyond a few hundred yards is absolutely impossible, they will not be able to get out again without heavy disaster, or words to that effect; whether he can state what the visibility was on the night of 23rd–24th November, and whether the enemy destroyers were able to get away without heavy disaster; whether his confident hope was fulfilled and, if not, can he explain why it was not fulfilled; and whether he can now state which great Power has complete command of the English Channel and North Sea?
Mr. BALFOURA report received from the Vice-Admiral Commanding at Dover states that about 10.45 p.m., on the night of Thursday, the 23rd of November, six enemy destroyers, apparently attempting to pass south inside the Downs, came in contact with the Ramsgate Drifter Patrol. The night was dark and misty, and the enemy made off at once, before they could be engaged by our vessels protecting the shipping in the Downs.
The last of the six enemy vessels opened fire on two of our armed drifters. About twelve shots were fired, some of which hit the drifter "Acceptable." This vessel, however, sustained no casualties and but little damage. The engagement lasted a few minutes.
311 As regards the last part of my hon. Friend's question, I must observe that the enemy destroyers did not enter the Channel. I still entertain the hope to which my hon. Friend refers.
§ Mr. HOUSTONMay I ask my right hon. Friend whether the Admiralty will not forget that attack is one of the surest forms of defence, and whether we do not require ruthless fighting men in the Admiralty?
Mr. BALFOURThose broad, general principles are no doubt perfectly sound in the abstract, but if my hon. Friend means that the Board of Admiralty are to use His Majesty's ships to attack batteries on shore without scruple, ruthlessly, that is not a policy that I for one shall ever consent to.
§ Mr. HOUSTONArising out of the right hon. Gentleman's answer, may I say that my remark was not directed to any towns on shore, but to submarines?