HONOURS FOR OFFICERS

Southland Times, Issue 24002, 18 December 1939, Page 7

HONOURS FOR OFFICERS

British Commodore Knighted THREE CAPTAINS RECEIVE C.B. (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright) (Received December 17, 7 p.m.) RUGBY, December 16. The Admiralty announces that in recognition of the gallant and successful action fought by the Achilles, Exeter and Ajax against the German battleship Admiral Graf Spee the King has been pleased to appoint Commodore Henry Harwood to be a Knight Commander of the Bath and Captain W. E. Parry, of the Achilles, Captain C. H. L. Woodhouse, of the Ajax, and Captain F. S. Bell, of the Exeter, to be Companions of the same order. Commodore Harwood also has been promoted to Rear-Admiral in his Majesty’s Fleet, to date December 13, the date of the action. The Admiralty has called for recommendations from Rear-Admiral Harwood in respect of the good conduct and forwardness in action of the officers and men in the squadron under his command. The promotion and honours announced by the Admiralty are assured of enthusiastic endorsement by the public; which greeted the news of the engagement in the South Atlantic as a brilliant vindication of British sea traditions. . Extracts from the foreign Press which have reached London show that the significance of the action is also widely appreciated abroad. The cordial references in the newspapers of France naturally have given pleasure here. One Paris newspaper says: “Our friends once again attained their mastery, their courage, their tactical knowledge and that sea sense which is their second nature.” The skill of the British commanders is the subject of much comment in the neutral Press. The verdict which recurs frequently finds typical expression in the remarks of The St. Louis PostDespatch: “The bogy of the pocket battleship seems to have been deflated.” The same idea recurs in the conclusion reached by the Latvian newspaper Segodnia that the British “habit” of naval victory has been revived. The tribute of the Prime Minister (Mr Neville Chamberlain) to the very gallant action fought by three comparatively small British ships against a much more heavily armed adversary off the south coast of America is warmly endorsed in the Press. “The running fight, in which unarmoured ’ and out-gunned cruisers compelled a German battleship to seek an inglorious refuge in a neutral port, will,” says The Daily Telegraph, “rank with the most splendid exploits of the frigates against the three deckers in the brave days of old.”

AMERICAN COUNTRIES ANGRY REPETITION OF BATTLE NOT DESIRED (Received December 17, 6.30 p.m.) NEW YORK, December 16. Measures that the South American countries are studying to prevent a repetition of the Admiral Graf Spee incident include the adoption of uniform legislation providing for the immediate internment of any belligerent’s warships entering a neutral port, says the Montevideo correspondent of 'Hie New York Times. This is at present a Brazilian law.

Uruguay’s protest to Britain and Germany, charging them that part of the battle was fought within the jurisdictional waters of the River Plate has angered the Americas and convinced them that protection of their neutrality will require something stronger than resolutions. The feeling is growing that the Admiral Graf Spee took refuge to escape the tactical disadvantage of the battle rather than because she was in danger of sinking. The Montevideo correspondent of Ths New York Times states that Uruguay has sent Britain and Germany Notes protesting against their having fought within the mouth of the River Plate. The Notes state that although the River Plate is over three miles wide, Argentina and Uruguay consider that its entire width constitutes their jurisdictional waters. They also make a charge that the warships at one time were exchanging shots within the three-mile limit. They further protest against the battle taking place within 300 miles of . the neutral zone established at the Panama Conference. The River Plate is more than 100 miles wide off Montevideo. The Argentine and Uruguayan Governments are determined to prevent, if possible, a naval action within it. It is understood that the combined navies will begin patrolling at 5 p.m. on Sunday. The State Department at Washington is most concerned at the prospect of a repetition of the sea battle. The Secretary of State (Mr Cordell Hull) indicated that it -would be viewed as another serious breach of the neutrality zone. The engagement between three British cruisers and the German pocket battleship Admiral Graf Spee on Wednesday night, which resulted in the latter running for shelter in Uruguayan waters naturally recalled the proposal discussed in September at a PanAmerican conference at Panama for a 300-mile neutrality zone in the Western Atlantic, states a British Official Wireless message. At the time of the conference British official circles showed sympathy with the object of the scheme, but serious misgivings were expressed about its practicability. The difficulties which were envisaged then would seem to have been illustrated by the most recent events. It is obvious that the German battleship was operating within an area corresponding with the proposed neutral zone for one purpose and one purpose on ]y_the destruction of Allied merchant shipping. No belligerent whose shipping was thus exposed to attack could accept the. restrictions which restricted the ability of its warships to afford protection and resist enemy action in a certain area unless it could rely on the same restrictions being effectively enforced against enemy warships as well. It may be assumed that real and practical difficulties such as this, and not lack of goodwill, accounts for the fact that the British Government has not yet given formal expression to its views on the scheme formulated by the Pan-American States.