STRONG COMMENT

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 59, Issue 198, 5 June 1939, Page 5

STRONG COMMENT

FULL INFORMATION DEMANDED. QUESTIONS AS TO MINISTERS. CONTROL OF RESCUE WORK. (Received This Day, 10.40 a.m.)' LONDON, June .3, The Lord Mayor of London is opening a fund for tho. families of the victims of the submarine disaster. The “Daily Mail” urges an early answer as to who is blameworthy for tho disaster, and asks where were Earl Stanhope (First Lord of the Admiralty) and Mr Q. IT. Shakespeare (Parliamentary Secretary) while the nation waited with bated breath? It demands the appointment of a competent Minister to supply information in such emergencies. The “Daily Herald” insists on the public being informed, and demands that if the Admiralty holds an inquiry, that private members of Parliament be supplied with a report in order to debate it. The “News-Chronicle” says that in the course of his statements, Mr Woodwar (secretary to Cammed, Laird arid Co) explains that the Admiralty was the sole source of the news. Ho gave all the available information direct to the press. He addecl that no one person or party was in actual charge of the rescue work, which was clone cooperatively by everyone on the sea. No time was lost in getting Caniell Laird’s experts to the Thetis. The “Daily Telegraph” deprecates the seeking of personal scapegoats, brit criticises official reticence to the press, and insists that nothing he hushed up and that nobody be shielded. EVERY ADVERSE CIRUMSTANCD. CRITICS’ LACK OF KNOWLEDGE. (Received This Day, 1:55 p.m.) LONDON, June 4. “The Times” points -out that every adverse circumstance hampered the rescue work, and adds that the criticisms are mainly unsupported by technical knowledge, though there was certainly a dearth of information. THREE QUESTIONS ASKED. THE MEASURES FOR RESCUE. PRESS DEMANDS ANSWER.

LONDON, June 4

Tho press complains of uncertainty about the progress of the rescue work in tho Thetis, largely through the brusque imeommunieativcness of., officials of the firm of Cammed, .Laird and Co. toward 100 journalists representing newspaper agencies in Britain, France and America.

A deputation of journalists was allowed to pass the outer gates only after they had sent a joint letter to Mr R. S. Johnson, managing director of the firm,, who gave tho first authentic account since the submergence of the Thetis two days Arlier.

Leading articles demand ruthless pressing for the proper answering of all questions relating to the loss of the crew of the Thetis and the failure to effect a rescue.

The Birkenhead correspondent of the “Evening Standard” reports that men and women, relatives of the men' in the Thetis, are . asking why the mishap was allowed to end in disaster. There wore mutterings of indignation among tho crowds waiting for news outside Cammed, Laird’s shipyard. The m'en, many, of whom have export knowledge of submarines, are asking three questions, which are: (1) Why, since 18 feet of the tail was above water for 12 hours, was it not possible to cut a hole in the hud and rescue the men before any attempt was made to raise the submarine? (The Admiralty says tho submarine was not. far enough out of the wafer for a. hole to be cut.) (2) Why was there such delay in getting an ail-line welded to the hull? (It is reported, without official confirmation, that an air-line was being attached 'when the steel hawser broke and the Thetis sank. The Admiralty says there were great diving difficulties in the tide-way.)

(3) Why were huge air-filled pontoons not secured to the hud before any attempt was made to raise it with a hawser? (The Admiralty says it is not certain, but it . believes that the Thetis slipped from tho wires when she swung round on the flood tide.)

The “Sunday Exp ress” mentions that the rescues from tho United States submarine Squalus were effected with a diving bell, and says the British Navy has no such bed. The Admiralty now has to explain why not, it says.,. The Admiralty will have to explain, this newspaper continues, why the Thetis carried out a dive in 132 feet of water when her own length is 265 feet.

Replying to rumours that tho Thetis was involved in previous accidents, and also that too many were aboard, the managing director of Cammed, Laird’s (Mr Johnson) said that the previous mishaps were insignificant. The Thetis once hit the firm’s dock after a trial, lie said, and another trial was ■ postponed because her diving gear was unworkable; but the Thetis dived twice previously in tho dock basin.

He denied that the Thetis was overcrowded, and said that on the last trial it was necessary to carry sub-contrac-tors and Admiralty 7 officials.. About a dozen could have been accommodated in an accompanying tug, but preferred the submarine.