ROYAL OAK CASE FEATURES RECALLED.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18576, 26 September 1928, Page 8

ROYAL OAK CASE FEATURES RECALLED.

With dramatic Suddenness public attention was gripped by the Royal Oak incident in March last—a case which subsequently occupied the front pages of the newspapers for over a month. On March 17 came the news that Admiral Collard had hauled down his flag following a quarrel among the officers. All manner of rumours gained currency, and then came the facts. naval officers of high rank took the centre of the stage, and one of the most sensational trials in the history of the Navy began. Commander 11. M. Daniel was court-martialled and found guilty of writing a report upon events connected with the departure of Rear-Admiral B. St G. Collard, which he addressed to Captain Dewar, such report being subversive of discipline and contrary to the King’s regulations. Another charge on which Commander Daniel was found guilty was that he read from a certain document in the ward-room of H.M.S. Royal Oak certain remarks and criticisms of his superior officer, Rear-Ad-miral Collard, which were calculated to bring Admiral Collard into contempt, and which were subversive of naval discipline. Then began the trial of Captain Dewar, who was found guilty of a breach of discipline in that he accepted from Commander Daniel a report on the departure of Admiral Collard from H.M.S. Roval Oak, the terms of which were subversive of discipline and contrary to the King's regulations. Captain Dewar was ordered to be severely reprimanded and dismissed from his ship, which usually results in an early voluntary retirement from the service. The whole trouble had its genesis in certain incidents aboard H.M.S. Royal Oak during a dance, when Admiral Collard used bad language in the hearing of guests. Commander Daniel, giving evidence at the court-martial, said that Admiral Collard, addressing the bandmaster, said: “You call a flagship band, fit to be in a rear-admiral’s flagship? I have never heard such a blanky awful noise in all my life. It’s like a dirge! I’ll have you sent Home to-morrow! ’* Admiral Collard later told witness: “ I cannot have a like that on my ship.’* Commander Daniel said that Admiral Collard spoke loudly, and several people heard him, including ladies, officers and guests. Later the Admiral called •fitness to

his cabin, s&ying : “ The chaplain has accused me of calling the bandmaster a “— —. I didn’t, did I?” Commander Daniel said: “You referred to the bandmaster as a in mine, the band s and the ladies’ hearing.” The Admiral then became angry, and said it was a lie, and that such accusation would involve a court-martial. Commander Daniel’s evidence continued: ‘‘lie asked how dared I mv such a thing, and I replied: * Nothing, Sir, will budge me from the statement. U ould I make these statements at this stage of my careei if you had left any possible room for doubt about what you said?’ I then proposed to Admiral Collard that, in order to avoid a scandal, I should have carte blanche to make the best redress possible to the individuals entitled to it. The Admiral wished me success. I left the cabin and spoke to the Major of Marines and told him I would take it upon myself to accept a full apology from the Admiral. The Major said: ‘ I place m3 r self in the captain’s and vour hands. If you are satisfied, I shall be glad not'to have to press the matter.’ ” Commander Daniel said he reported these views to Admiral Collard, who praised his tact, and concluded bv saying: “Thanks very much for getting me out of a damned nasty hole.” Witness said that thereafter his relations with Admiral Collard were most cordial. Commander Daniel said that he had satisfied himself that the bandmaster's grievance was that Admiral Collard called him a . He described Admiral Collard’s landing at Malta, where he had no doubt that the Admiral did not return bis salute. .Mr Kimball: What was 3'our impression of Admiral Collard’s behaviour on this occasion? Commander Daniel :*A deliberate insult. In reference to his action in reading to his brother officers a letter criticising Admiral Collard’s conduct, Commander Daniel said that he read put in the wardroom the phrase, “ inflamed with indignation,” and all agreed that he had not overstated the case. Wardroom officers gave evidence approving of Commander Daniel’s letter. They also stated that the dance incident created great indignation. The navigating officer, Commander Brownlow, said that, as president of the wardroom mess, he felt that all the world should know that they resented the incident, consequently he told Commander Daniel that his letter was , quite correct.