BEDFORD'S CHARGES

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 626, 1 October 1909, Page 9

BEDFORD'S CHARGES

; COMMITTEE'S REPORT; ?. VINDICATION OF FISHER REGIME.. 1 ■■■ ■ \ "! Tho "Daily Mail" of .August 14 contains .tho . ollowing ; summary of the. report of Mr. As- Z [uith's !. Committee which considered " Lord Y Jharlesßercsf ord's . impeachment: .of ' the or-' si ;anisation'of: the Navy, for war. ■ : .' L .1. There was no danger t6. the.country.J ' 2. The arrangements were, not/ ideally per.CCt.; , w 3. They were hampered by tho nbsonco of c lordial; relations' belnveen. the, Admiralty and jord Charles. • • ■■ 11 1. The Admiralty did not take • him suffi;icntly into their coutidcnco. {] 5. He'did not: appreciate antl carry nut tho c ipirit of'their instructions and rccogniso their ri Paramount authoilty. . .■ , r The committee ; aro impressed, by;the diiferinces' of opinion among officers, and look for- 1 jrard to the development of.a Naval War SUff. 1 ; Dealing-more 'in detail 'wi.tji, the, 1 report, the 5 'Daily-fail's" summaiy proceeds;— " " '. 'i'he.' committee who : I inquired into ; . Lord a Jharlos Bercsford's memorandum wero a. sub- t :ommitteo of. the Committee of Imperial De-. -'.v 'once,'; and consisted iOf: "Mr. 1 Asquith(in, tho . t ihair), Lord (Jrowo, Lord Morley, Sir Edward: . irdy, and Mr. Ilaldane. ■ . . . . h ■ SixteenYmeetings were held-, and;, 2600 ques- ii ;ions put. Lord Charles. was accompanied by -• idmiral Sir E- Custauce, and the Admiralty. ,* •ras represented by Mr. il'Kenna and Sir John a t'isher.... , £ Tho'.following .shows Lord Charles's; charges, t the'reply ''of?:the Admiralty, and, the conclusion if. jfr. Asquith's .committee ,on , the various. I points:—. k ' FLEET ORGANISATION. Lord C. Beresford. (1) The fleets for the dofence of home waters 'Lord C. Beresford declared) wero dispersed . under separate commands, which he;, regarded is a" danger.- .Thoiigh in the aggregate superior to the enemy, the ships wero liable to bo overwhelmed iii,detail by.unforeseen attack. ■- ;< (2) The Channel Fleet (which he commanded) 0 was rarely."maintained-' at '.its: numbers,' and -:J was never oven for a day equal to the enemy ' t it might - meet, v--[ :■ ■■■■■ •: : j Admiralty Reply. . ' :- (1) Tho same dispersion occurs in .the fleets ,j of Powers.. : (2) Tho Admiralty gavo figuros to show that, i thanks tooths' individual superiority of our .j vessels.-the'fighting.pqwer-fmeasured.by heavy -,c gun fire) of the Channel Fleet,.'even-allowing 1 for .absences for, had ..throughout. Lord n Charles's' command - been - always superior to / the 'nominaL .strength-of. tho .most forniid- ; able ; .fleet maintained in full commission 'in > peace, by any other nation, although the num- " borvof British battleships was less.. Similarly tho total strength of the- British ships in-full commission had been-overwhelm- : ingly superior to that of the .ships , maintained -i byi?any. other 'in .full commission,-'and -i the 'r'eservefstrengthvqf ■ the? British fleet had' ; i been; immensely superior: to that of any .other- 'i Power. _. -I i The' Admiralty said tb&t, tlie ori.faiisation '1 in vHomejwatersduring Lord C. Borcsford's y. command had .-been -a" necessary - stage during. :; a' .transitional period of \ exceptional- difficulty, .1 and :had'-.not, ■ .they l 'admitted, been;': from-, a :i Bti'iiteftical -..point ■'of ;• view,; an : .unimpeachablo 'I arrangement. ' j !: They ' Claimed that' the : Channel Fleet had .( always been; superior,, having regard to tho ! ] Superior ' Quality; of ■ the British ships,, :notwithstanding L anl-inferiors number Aof: units.,;';. ■'( Committee's Finding the:committee are of opinion that ; the Admiralty would have been botter advised: ■: M| radhdring : .throughout: ito " tho . principle v .bt. placing.:thp;chief,command 'Home .waterS in - the.?hauds::Of ,a: : single" officer; -.'thoy' : think that ithe : exceptional'difficulties gt\'tho; trans'i-, • ■tional. stage .justified , the'dispbsitions nyvde.'. ,! .They,i, : ftre\.of; opinion -that' no v dasg6r tp- thij..; country in fact resnltod. ;; . i. (2) The committee'hold tlmfc'as to the Chan-; :• nel::Keet the Admiralfy.iinade. good thoir.'con-' ;• -teiitions.:';^ ; : i READINESS FOR WAR Lord C. Beresford. . ; ■— r.- • . ' j.Thrf'Homo'.'Fleet during his ! command: could - not'-;be regarded. M a striking, 'force . ready; for ; .immediiite action;':.' Ho oven/asserted -it' 1 could '"not be': ready Jn: less .'tt'Knvsix!njbnlh's.f-'Nuc-' i leu's .crews made : a considerable proportion, in- i >ffqctiyo;"' '■ ' Committee's Finding. ' 11 .. • evidence. : shoVed, ; :opinion, ;.;that ,-the nucldus .crew' .ships - wGro. ■capable 'bf arid; had i .attained.;a,satisfactoi7-;standard > .'of..efficienoy/ : LORD C. BERESFORD'S PLAN. Lord C. Beresford. Lord. Charles .engge'sted, to. remedy defects,by . establishing in Home , waters ;an.-. active , homo-' • geneObS-: fleet 'ih; full -commission'- and S; aim- ' plete in oyery: typo' of ship:.'; . ' ,'-. : ,Battle3hipsxflnd .•cruisers;'in ;three divisions, 1 : two:;of -which -tb :be'always with the Gdmman-der-in-Cl!iefi;..v-^-;..-;: [ Allowing for absences, any > two: divisions'com-' 1 ■bined- shplild,':be' superior. to . the largest- hostile forcc,- bat not exceed. as a rule sixty,the maximum number.that ono man can control. Committee's Reply.- . < : ( . ; -There isMn thO iCominittee's . opinion no difference - in- principle..:betweeu r Loril -Charles's suggestions and. the plan: recently, adopted by : the Admiralty. ;; ii- 1 ; '--'V ;: 'ilarcn last the.whole Home force; At>' laritio ::; Fleet-excepted//.is.. united under, ono- ' .'?'v;v ;; Ist Division ;.;(old :- :Nore , Division),: ; fally •" 'manned.. 1 ;• . • •: 2nd'.v;Division : :; (old Channel: Fleet),' fully. > manned. i-., 3rd Division,-nuclous crow ships. ■ . 4th. Division,-special. reserve, sbips. • 'V.That Satisfies in substance jail'. Lord Charles's ' ;r'e'quiretnehts;-;.-,the "Only ,: important difference :being < the ;Atiantic . Fleet' as,- an .. independent command -for; strategical'.'reasone.;'.> ; •: i. ; .The committee.;cdnour ;.with; Sir:-'Ar Wilsdii ii',; regarding.;the: present'/.'organisation.: as free from - the:''6bjections,,whioh -:might; have : been ..fairly --arged^against, preceding arrangements. ft' those were not merely transitional. .; DESTROYER SHORTAGE. Lord C. Beresford. .. (1) There waa a- grave weakness dunng-biß command.;in-6maU-craft ;and destroyers. ::;.(2);Owing:-t6 ( .tho.tallcged dangerous shortage of cruisers: thero ; was no adequate ■ provision for protection of trade. -. : . ;. ■ ■ r.; - ..a , Committee's Finding. .: ( .- .: (1) 'Lord - Charles's criticisms - wero based ':upoh considerations! affecting naval construction ,and strategy ;'of:; a ..cpntroversiid l .: character,on which;expert' opinion ■ is. sharply divided., • 'On. .tho.-techiiical,' issued',', the 1 ...committee 'express' no opinion. VBut .they- aro'satisfic-d there'is no suoh ' defioieiicy,: 6s to constitute, a risk to - the safety of.'the country.. '~ ' j: (2): The' tenor; of - secret evidence is that thero is. no Efficient; foundation;, for V Lord; Charles's apprehensioßs. - . ' . . . ADMIRALTY WAR STAFF. Lord ChaM^ : ;originilly 'stafei that .'on ; . to' suming; command of tho'.Chahhel ' Fleet: "1 was unable to obtain any strategical..schem6 orjilan for tno disposal ot my forces m war." He modified .this in cross-examination, and the; committee ;nre r 'satisfied that he. had no' substantial grpiinds for'complaint. ' '' - Mr. MUCenna' gave detafla 6f steps to-de-velop.Va ;Warl Stall -at -,-the Admiralty and indicated further completed;,'advahces : in' this' direction. V : ,"t. GENERAL CONCLUSION. .' The: general conclusiPil of the .cdmmitteo'is: :' The investigation has. shown; that,during the time in- question .(March, 1907, to March,; 1003) ii 3 danger; to tile, country Resulted; frop uthe ; Admiralty's, arrangements -■ for . !-war, ! ~.whether considered from .the standpoint of the'organisation :and .distribution of-tlo fleets, the number ; of-''ships,' or the preparation of, war .plans. They-feel bound to add that arrangements : quite: defensible in thehißelves,' though not ideally perfect, -wero m .practice seriously hampored : through tho absenco of cordial relations between tho Board of Admiralty and tho Com-mander-in-Chief, of'the Channel Flcot. : -Tho Board of - Admiralty do. not appcir to . have taken Lord; Charles Beresford sufficiently' into their; confidence: as -to -the reasons for; dispositions to - which ho took- oxcoption; - and Lord y Charles Beresford, on tho, otlior hand, appears vto have failed to appreciate and carry out the Wpirit of the instruction', of the Board and to •oeognise their 'paramount authorityj The': committee havo been impressed with the ereuccs of opinion among officers of ■ high and' : professional ..attainments- regardiag •taiit principles,of -naval 'strategy and tacind they look forward with much, conti/lo the.-further development .of !:a'naval '• staff; .from .which the. naval members of 'loard and 'flag'• officers' anditheir.staffs at