ROYAL OAK

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXI, 10 April 1928, Page 5

ROYAL OAK

COURT-MARTIAL SENTENCES

QUESTION OF REMISSION

TO RE CONSIDERED P.Y \DMIRAI.TY

(United Press Association i\ipvrit?ln>

LONDON, Hill Apnl

It j.s understood that ihe Admiralty intends carefulK to consider the documents relating to the Royal Oak courtmartial, to determine whether they disclose anything to justify the remission of tile sentences imposed on Captain Dewar and Commander Daniel.

The "Sunday En press" points mil thai both have brilliant records in gunnery, and the authorities have a natural reluctance to lose their services in view nl the vital importance of gunnery and Ihe heavy cost of training experts.

In view of the misconception regard ing Admiral Collard, the "Morning Posts'' naval correspondent points out that the Admiral has received the heaviest punishment possible. Following the letters from Captain Dewar and Com inander Daniel. Sir Roger Keyes orderid a Court of Inquiry to investigate. Upon considering the report, of this Court Admiral Keyes came to the conclusion I hill the conduct of all three ollieers was open 'to question, lie therefore relieved them of their respective duties. The Admiralty subsequently eon firmed this action. Admiral Collard was satisfied that he bail acted with lack of discretion and judgment, and accepted tin- ruling of the Cominaiider-in Chief. hauled down his (lag. ami declined to hoist it temporarily on another ship pending the Admiralty confirmation. To him this was a hitler blow. Unforllll)atelv his action was not allowed to have Ihe' res,ill be desired. Captain Dewar ami Commander Daniel did nol accept the judgment of Admiral Keyes. and. arriving in England, asked for instatemen! on their ship or a court martial. The Admiralty granted a court-martial. the result of which is known.

It is staled from Gibraltar that Admiral Collard is still on full pay. Captain Dewar and Commander Daniel are going home at their own expense. Caplain Dewar's half-pnv is about £6BO, and Commander Daniel's £4OO.

Although Mr P.ridgeman announced on sth April 'thai an Admiralty statement on the Royal Oak position would follow, it is not' likely that there will be any development at present. Mr P.ridgeman is spending Easier in Norrnnndv, and will be 'there at least it week." Captain "Dewar and Commander Daniel have telegraphed that they are, leaving for London from Gibraltar by the Ratipura on Sunday. Sir Robert Hutchison. M.P., interviewed, said: "The punishment of Caplain Dewar and Commander Daniel may prove to be nominal. 1 doubt whether the public realise, how Admiral Collar*! has suffered." Commander Kenworthy, M.P.. said: "If their future careers are to be nildulv prejudiced. I think the matter ought to be raised in the House of Commons." The "Dailv Chronicle" urges Parliament to draw the Admiralty's attention to the regulations concerning the system of court-martial and naval discipline. The fad thai findings'so completely opposed to the public sense of justice are possible shows that I heir amendment, is needed. The "Daily Express says: Public opinion may be summarised as follows:

(1| The whole incident is discreditable to the naval authorities. Mismanage- ,„,.„! thai permitted an impression of llltllinv to be created onl of a vulgar in 7.7. band squabble deserves the strongest .ensure.' (2) Admiral Collard cannot be acquitted of a share of responsibilifv for the incident and the consequences (3) Captain Dewar and Commander Daniel broke the regulations and earned a sentence, hut their actions were prompted bv excessive zeal and loyalty to the personnel, and for that reason their case deserves special consideration. They should be reemployed at an '"The'"Dailv Herald" says: "It should not be forgotten thai the system of which Captain Rewar and Commander Daniel are victims is a system under which the less exalted ratings suiter even harsher treatment, with the odds still more heavily weighted agamsl them. For the latter there is no publicity, only punishment.'' The "Dailv Tdegranh says:: Public opinion has taken a much wider view than courts-martial are competent- to ',;,!;,, t has arrived at the conclusion t | i;l l these things ought never to have

happened in connection wdh a service f,,,! whose, reputation the eyes of the world and every patriotic English sul>- :,,-., ~,.,. jealously concerned, lhe staleincut from the Admiralty promised by Mr Pridgeman is certainly necessary. Jt is hoped" it will be of such a nature as

lo show thai the conditions on the Rovrd Oak cannot he regarded as typical of the morale and spirit of selt-restrtimt nxn t»,e officers throngnont the service. Tim' "Morning Post" does no doubt H,„ justice of the decision and hopes the matter will be allowed to rest.

PERSONAL RECONCILIATION (Received 10th April. 10.55 a.m.) LONDON, 9th April. "I did it because 1 regret personal at-,,,-ks on Rear-Admiral Collstrd. as there has never been any personal malice heween us I consider be has suffered l, nnvi |y enough already." This is the explanation of his friendly farewell ij ( ,„-. \dmiral Collard winch Captain liewtir gave to the ••Evening Standard rciuvsenlnlive on the Ranpurn. Admiral Mark Kerr, in an interview. -.aid it was a welcome reconciliation ot the parties, but it was a pity Ihcy <!"' rio t shake hands before the court inn,,irv It. would have, saved the Nav> washing dirtv linen in public. Commoner Bellairs said the persona reconciliation .locs not affect the need shown by (he courfnuirtial o safeguardi„,r the rigid of complaint. If high officers like Captain Dewar and Commander Dmiiel are not permitted to complain without risking their careers what is the position of the lower ranks: