§ Major ARCHER-SHEEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether, in view of the misconstruction which has been 731W placed upon his statement with reference to captain Carver, late of His Majesty's ship "Torch," that this officer had confined a man in the refrigerating room, when, as a matter of fact, this was the deck house, in which the engine was kept for the magazine cooling machinery, that it was four times the size of the regulation cell, and was one of the best lighted and ventilated places in the ship, and that the man was only placed there in order to alleviate the discomfort of being confined under a canvas screen in a tropical climate, he can make any statement to lessen the injury to this officer's character which has been caused by his statement; (2) whether a circular letter was issued to the Fleet by the Admiralty ordering officers to see that their ship's company were alert and active; whether, in view of this order, the captain of His Majesty's ship "Torch" was perfectly within his rights in ordering one of the ship's company, who had been slow and apathetic in his movements, to go over the lower-mast head, which was not in the nature of a punishment but an exercise; and whether it has been the custom in the Service to use this exercise in masted ships from time immemorial, and that in this case it only meant ascending and descending a height of about 50 feet; (3) whether, in the case of two men who were deprived of good conduct badges for failure to obtain soundings early enough when approaching an anchorage in His Majesty's ship "Torch," he is aware that these men had previously been cautioned by the captain for the same failure, and warned that they would be punished if it occurred again; whether he is aware that His Majesty's ship "Torch" was at the time approaching what was practically an unsurveyed anchorage, and that the safety of the ship depended upon the proper performance of their duties by the leadsmen, especially as she was suspected of being in a very unseaworthy condition at the time, a suspicion which has since proved well grounded; whether, in view of these facts, the commanding officer's action was fully justified; and (4) whether, after having received a report from the Commander-in-Chief on the Australian station alleging disrespect to himself on the part of Captain Carver, and reporting upon the number of punishments on board the ship, the Admiralty received a subsequent report stating that no disrespect was in fact intended, and a further telegram asking that this officer should be retained in command of his ship?
732W
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI have already given a sufficient explanation to the House of the reasons which in the opinion of the naval authorities concerned rendered this officer's supersession necessary, and I have at the same time borne witness to his good services on other occasions. I am not prepared to debate the case upon a series of argumentative questions at Question Time. If the hon. Member wishes to impugn the justice or the propriety of the action taken by the Admiralty—for which I accept the fullest responsibility—he should use the opportunities presented by the passage of the Estimates. In the general interests of naval discipline I must ask the House to support me in recommending such procedure to him.