Gray River Argus WEDNESDAY, April 11, 1928. THE NAVAL SCANDAL.

Grey River Argus, 11 April 1928, Page 4

Gray River Argus WEDNESDAY, April 11, 1928. THE NAVAL SCANDAL.

The Gibraltar Naval Court Martial, which ill the press cables has been given much greater prominence than events of far greater importance— owing, no doubt, to the affair being “starred” by the London papers—appears to be boiling down merely to a personal difference. .Much ado about nothing sums it up. except in one respect, to which attention was first drawn by the Labour, paper, the Daily lieraid, and later by a former naval officer of high standing. Commander Carlyon Bellairs. On Ihe strength of the fact that two officers. Captain Dewar and Commander Daniel, had virtually reported Admiral Collard for ’conduct for which nobody has since been game to offer any shadow of an excuse, Sir Roger Keyes, the top dog, suspended all three, whilst the Admiralty sent the two officers who reported their superior to be tried by court martial. From the facts adduced at the trial, the Admiral had not a leg to stand on. Yet the result is that the other officers are cashiered, while the Admiral, although he voluntarily struck his flag, remains on full pay. It was demonstrated that Dewar and Daniel had no selfish ends to serve. It was not demonstrated that the Admiral served any other ends. It

is not going to help the Navy if the public are led to believe that the bureaucracy at the lop are ready to make scapegoats of junior for senior officers. As Commander Carlyon Bellairs, M.l’., says, the fact that Dewar afterwards shook hands with Collard, and that Daniel sent him a rceonviliatory note (which the cables, in the face of the revelations at the Court Martial, say illustrates strikingly the esprit de corps of

the Navy), /does not affect the need which the Court Martial lias thrown into strong relief. That need is the safeguarding of the right of complaint. “If.” says Commander • Carlyon Bellairs, “high officers like Captain Dewar and Commander Daniel arc not permitted to complain without risking their careers, what is the position of the lower ranks?” That is exactly the one good purpose which this scandal may ultimately serve. The action of Admiral Keyes put the real defcndanl in the case, not on his defence, but in the position of a plaintiff, whereas the real plaintiffs have hail to stand trial as culprits, and have been dismissed their ship. What a light this procedure throws upon the so-called mutinies of years gone by I Is it always the rule of the Admiralty to side with the top-dog, and kick the under-dog? The Daily Herald draws the well-warranted inference that if a finicky, pinpricking man at Hie lop can treat his subordinates in a manner such as was adopted on the Royal Oak. the rank and file have no chance of a hearing for their grievances at all. There were one or two inferior officers in the shiji’s company who came under the wrath of the Admiral, whose elegant phraseology in their regard would probably have earned him the father of a drubbing had he not been protected by his uniform. If Sir Roger Keyes had mil virtually put on their trial the plucky officers by whom the situation was made known, but rather had left it to a tribunal to decide ■who was really responsible, public opinion would never have tolerated such a verdict as that returned. It was not upon the merits of their complaint, but merely upon the fact that they had darejd to complain, that the two disraj-

cd men were condemned. It is t/> be hoped that Ihe rank and fife will now be given an opportuniwy to lodge complaints in neutral quarters, should the occasion fdf such arise. When put under till acid test, the officers do not e» actly appear paragons in their ah fit tide to one another, so that I is a moral certainty the men gei - erally come in for many a roug i spin about which the public knoj • nothing. If the rule were thL all could report directly to a net - ' tral authority a grievance for re- | dress, it would curb the tempra- / lion to arrogance which offieeij | must encounter in a service ill vhich the scales are weighted alogether against the under-dog,

Australian soldiers in ilie war taught “brass hats” of the Old Country more than one lesson, illustrated even lately by the abolition of further causes in the Army for tlie application of the death penalty. A few shiploads of sailors from the same quarter would doubtless prove a useful corrective for the self-import nice id' some naval officers.