§ 25. Mr. MOSESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that a serious state of discontent recently existed on board His Majesty's Ship "Revenge," to the extent that a number of the men made an insubordinate demonstration on shore against their captain who had inflicted punishments upon them; and what steps he is taking to deal with the situation?
Mr. ALEXANDERI apologise to the House for the length of the answer, but this a rather important matter.
The statements to which my hon. Friend presumably refers proved on investigation to be wholly erroneous. I am satisfied that the state of discipline on board His Majesty's Ship "Revenge" is quite satisfactory and that the allegations against the Commanding Officer, Captain J. A- G. Troup, were unfounded. It is not true that he inflicted any unfair punishments, or that he was the subject of an improper demonstration on shore. I understand that the ship's company have been indignant at the wholly unjustified reflections which these statements have brought upon them.
It is to be regretted that certain newspapers did not print an official Admiralty announcement denying the allegations, but on the contrary, with the announcement in their possession at the time, published the unfounded statements.
Such a publication reflecting on the discipline of the Fleet is much to be deprecated. I would add that such rumours, when brought to the notice of the Admiralty. are always investigated immediately. The authentic information obtained is invariably communicated to the Press, and I hope that in future all newspapers will treat such information as fairly as the great majority of the Press did on this occasion.
§ Mr. MOSESWhat steps are being taken to deal with the "Daily Mail" and the "Daily Express," the papers that were responsible for these allegations?
Mr. ALEXANDERI hope that the publicity given in this House to the question and answer to-day will be sufficient.
§ Major COLFOXCan the hon. Gentleman give us a list of the papers which published this untrue information?
§ Captain CROOKSHANKOn a point of Order. Is the hon. Member who put the question entitled to put it in that form, in view of the categorical denial of the First Lord of the Admiralty of the allegations made?
§ Mr. MOSESOn the point of Order. The explanation is that the question was 841 based upon reports which I had read. 1 put in the question which, in accord with the advice of the Clerks at the Table, was placed on the Order Paper in ' the form in which it is to be found there.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIf there is any fault to be found with the form of the question, I must bear the blame.