ROYAL OAK INQUIRY

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 5 April 1928, Page 5

ROYAL OAK INQUIRY

TENSE SCENES.

WHEN VERDICT WAS DELIVERED EFFECT OF THE SENTENCE. BY CABLE—PRESS ASSOCIATION—COPYRIGHT GIBRALTAR, April 3. In concluding his address foi the defence on behalf of Commander Hamel in tue Royal Oak eourt-ma«ial, Mr. Kimball maintained that Commander Daniel 1 ® actions had been performed in good faith and that, even if he were thought guilty of a technical offence, he had been actuated by his concern for the morale of the snip. The prosecution, on the other hand, maintained that Commander Daniel had included in his letter terms which were subversive of discipline and contravened Jhe King’s regulations and had publicly read such passages in tb« wardroom.

The method followed by Commandei Daniel, said the prosecutor, was highly improper and might have biassed witnesses at the Malta, court of inquiry. He criticised accused’® action in raking up past incidents, declaring that the navy rule was that complaints must be dealt with immediately, and not allowed to remain dormant until dragged in subsequently. Such procedure was essential tc the maintenance of justice. Mr. Kimball reminded the court that its verdi't would definitely determine Commander Daniel's career. The commander ought to be allowed to leport to the captain, wthout beng accused of breach of discipline.

The prosecutor, Mr. Calvert, replying, .submitted that Commander Daniel’s reading a secret document in the wardroom was highly improper and might have biassed witnesses on the original point. It was also disloyal to hi® superior. His criticisms had not been substantiated.

The court adjourned for 90 minutes. An uncomfortable silence succeeded the re-opening and the entrance of witnesses and public after the decision was reached. ’The hangar was now flooded with brilliant sunshine. Commander Daniel entered escorted by an officer of his own rank with drawn sword and gazed fixedly at his own blade, which had been so placed, with the point towards him, as to indicate guilt.' He squared hi® shoulders and marched to his place. Captain Measham, in a low voice, announced the verdict. It was _ a sad moment, and at least one of h : s bro ther officers in court was visibly affected.

Captain Dewar’s court-martial opens to-morrow. It is understood that he intends personally to cross-examine Admiral Collard. The hearing is orpected to last three days. Commander Daniel’s sentence means that he will he on half pay until the Admiralty thinks fit to employ him again, but if he is not given an active billet within the period fixed by tne regulations he will automatically go on the retired list on the retired pay of a commander, that being £SOO a year. The naval correspondent of the “Daily Express’’ says that _ on the rarest occasion does an officer live down such a bad mark, but _th© Admiralty has power to modify the sentence of a court-martial. —Australian Press Association—United Service.

OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.

LONDON, April 4

Commander Daniel's offence' against the letter of regulations is manifest,” says the “Daily Telegraph.” “The verdict, therefore, was almost a foregone conclusion, hut public opinion has been deeply stirred and will demand that the Admiralty and the Government review the series of incidents which have cast a shadow _ over the senior service. The pnhlic is amazed and affronted at the essential pettiness thereof, and will wonder whether amid so much talk of naval discipline the practice of self-discipline in higher ranks has been consistently observed.”

Tlie “Daily Express” says: “The public are entitled to their own opinion of the events which caused Commander Daniel to exceed the limited disciplinary conduct, hut the Court had to deal with the breaking of a naval law.” The “Daily Chronicle” says the verdict means- that no officer under any provocation can safely venture to exercise the right of protest. — Australian Press Association. TRIAD OF CAPTAIN DEWAR. PERSONNEL OF COURT ALTERED. CONDUCTS HIS OWN DEFENCE. Received 9.45 a.m. to-day. GIBRALTAR, Apri 1 4. At the opening of the trial of Captain Dewar, the prosecutor, Rear-Ad-miral Royle. objected to the inclusion in the court’s personnel of Rear-Ad-miral Meade, who participated in the preliminary inquiry, also of RearAdmiral Tomkinson, who had seen the preliminary papers. The court upheld the objection and replaced them with Captains Mon roe and Bedford. It also upheld the objection to Rear-Admira’ Oollard’s presence, because he was a witness.

Captain Dewar often smiled while the famous letter was read. He pleaded not guilty. Captain Dewar is conducting his own defence, with Mr Kirnhall as advisory friend. —Australian Press Association —United Service.