§ 5 and 6. Commander BELLAIRSasked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) how many courts-martial have been held for disciplinary offences in the Navy, and how many have been held to inquire into the losses of worships since the outbreak of war; and (2) how many courts-martial were held to inquire into the losses of warships between the outbreak of war and the formation of the Coalition Government in 1915, and how many "Dreadnoughts," battleships, cruisers, mercantile cruisers, and destroyers, respectively, were lost in that period?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAIt is manifestly not in the public interest to give this information. My right hon. Friend desires me to add, however, that if the idea is to suggest that there has been any change of Admiralty policy in the matter of holding courts-martial in consequence of the changes of Government, it is entirely without foundation of any sort or kind.
§ Commander BELLAIRSCan the right hon. Gentleman say why it is manifestly against the public interest to give the number of courts-martial for losses of ships that have taken place during the regime of the First Lord of the Admiralty at the beginning of the War; and why it is against the public interest to give what has always been given—the number of courts-martial that have been held on disciplinary offences?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI am afraid I cannot add to the answer given, except to repeat that any suggestion that there has been any change of Admiralty policy in the matter of holding courts-martial in consequence of the changes of Government, is entirely without foundation.
§ Commander BELLAIRSIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has contended that there is no time to hold these courts-martial in connection with losses of war vessels; whereas there have been hundreds and thousands of courts-martial for disciplinary offences?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThat is not the only contention, as was stated in the Debate on the Adjournment before the recess.