NAVAL OFFICER v. EDITOR.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 29, 26 May 1914, Page 6

NAVAL OFFICER v. EDITOR.

DAMACES„AWARDED FOR LJBEL. [By Eleotbic [United Pbem Ausopiation.] (Received 11.40 a.m.) ' London, May 25. Qaptain Kemp secured £3OOO damages, but a stay of proceedings was refused.- ■ ■ ■ Hexley admitted he only investigated 'the men's case and did not ask .Kemp's explanations. He stated that Mr Fisher and Mr McKenna thanked him for his services to the navy. • The judge, in summing up, protested against the increase of the pernicious habit of trial by newspaper. Yexley's Mas . the most ragged plea of justification he had ever seen. If Kemp were a strict disciplinarian, the jury must say whether he was blameworthy for the discontent on board the London.

A cablegram on the 18th hist, stated :*—Captain Thomas Webster Kemp, formerly commander of the battleship London, has sued Mr Lionel Yexlcy, editor of the periodical Fleet for. libel. Captain Kemp's counsel stated that the paper appealed to the lower deck and solicited from tho crew criticisms of their superior officers. An article on the battleship London likened the conditions aboard to the swashbuckling at Zabern. Captain Kemp, in his evidence, denied that the vessel was seething with discontent. He admitted that ho had not been reappointed to the command of the London when the vessel was recomniissioned. The further hearing of tho case was adjourned. (Captain Kemp has recently been senior naval officer in the Persian Gulf. He entered the Navy in 1880. Mr Yexley was at one time in the Xavy, but resigned in 1898 to take up journalism and -to fight the vicious system of victualling tho Navy and running naval canteens. He has published several books on naval matters.)