DISASTER TO THE AUDACIOUS

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2357, 13 January 1915, Page 6

DISASTER TO THE AUDACIOUS

NEWS STILL SUPPRESSED IN BRITAIN. Some weeks ago the lengthy account of the disaster to the British Dreadnought Audacious, published in.. the American newspapers, was reprinted m The Dohinion. , Yesterdayis mail brings the following comment on the matter in the London "Morning Post" of December 3:—"The proud Briton, after reading a diatribe in his favourite organ on the inspired and mendacious German Press, enters his club, and takes up by chance an Amerioan newspaper. . There he sees a full and circumstantial account of—shall we say it?—a certain naval mishap now a month old. Everything is there, date, circumstances, the narratives of eye-witnesses. Americans home from Europe tell the melodramatic story of how a whole ship was sworn to Becrecy so that the hideous truth should not be known. The proud Briton has probably already heard it as a' vague and disastrous rumour, but he has thrust it aside as incredible. But here the evidence stares him in the face. What is "he. to say? What-is he to think? What is he to believe? His own favourite newspaper says nothing. He feels himself surrounded by ah impalpable web of mystery, of deceit, of shadowy and impending calamity. His national self-confidence and self-respect are Bnaken,' if not destroyed: he is from that .time a nervous and unhappy man, apprehensive of fate, credulous of evil, ready to believe the worst!. Such is the result of lack., of.candour at, headquarters; one piece of moral cowardice infects and disturbs the whole public. We should like to speak plainly on this subject, yet the, Tower may await us if we do. The British Press is, in fact, forbidden to mention a mishap to the British Navy, of which the Press of the whole world is speaking; The German Press have for some time been in full possession of the facts, which they gathered from America, and are gloating over them, not so much because they relate to a material loss, but because their suppression in England; seems to them to offer evidence that the British nation is in a state of panio, and is not to be trusted with the truth. Thus, for ©ffimple, the "Kolnische Zeitung" says:—"Tho i English Government dared not communicate this serious loss to the nation because it feared a universal excitement. A very low estimate is thus placed by its own Government on the nerves and character of the English people—which gives one cause to think." We are bound to say that for once we agree 'with-' a German newspaper: it joes give one cause to think. There is involved a mishap—of considerable material dimensions no doubt—but nothing to causo anything more than a national sigh of regret. And it is treated by the Government as if it were some appalling catastropho so dark that merely to read about it would throw the nation into a state of frenzy.- '.. It lias, as a matter of fact, boon known to the bulk of the public for some time, and the actual now» bus not disturbed Ijham; ghat fefla dialed

them is tho knowledge that the Government or the Admiralty places so low a value on the hearts and nerves of Englishmen that they are supposed not to bo able to bear the truth. The news, we repeat, is no secret: it is known in every country but our own: it has been discussed in the American Press from every point of view, in all its bearings, there is hardly ah aspect of it which has not been considered in one or other of their papers and periodicals; in every British club where there are American exchanges it is fully • known; but yet the free British Press is not allowed to say a word about it. It is, ridiculous; but it is also humiliating. We say plainly that it is an insult not only to the British Press, but to the British nation.

"Once again we would venture to warn the Prime Minister and the Government of the-need of a strong Admiralty, which would restore the faith of the nation. They are running very grave risks, far more grave than the public understands, by keeping an amateur of Mr. Churchill's characteristics at the head of the Admiralty. Some timo ago wo were accused of party spirit when we ventured to draw attention to some most disturbing aspects of the Antwerp business. We were confident then that events would justify the warning. Since that time other newspapers of both sides in politics havo seen and proclaimed the danger. Even the Government organ, the "Westminster Gazette," has published an article not obscurely hinting at the need for a strong Board of Admiralty. The civilian has been given a fair chance: he has not succeeded. It is high time that the nightmare of uneasiness should he lifted from the publio mind and the experts given free play. The nation and the Fleet alike desire to see the Navy managed by a capable Board of Admirals on the active service list, not too young to command confidence, but not too old for the weight of responsibility. If this is not done we warn the Government that there may cornea day of very heavy reckoning."