NAVAL COURTS-MARTIAL

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2395, 26 February 1915, Page 5

NAVAL COURTS-MARTIAL

MOTION IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.. (Reo. February 20, 11.15 p.m.) London, February. 25. The Marquis of Selborue, in : tnd House of Lords, moved in the direction of affirming the expediency of maintaining courts-martial in the best interests of the Navy and of the public. Ho said that Mr. Churchill's explanation was a departure from custom, and. unworthy of his intelligence. There were strong arguments in favour of courts-martial in the case of the Formidable, Grecy, Hogue, and Aboukir. [The question of holding a court-mar-tial on every ship that is lost was raised in the House of Commons, and Mr. Churchill (First Lord of the Admiralty) pointed out that the novel conditions of warfare presented to naval officers problems of incomparable hazard and difficulty, and a court-martial would frequently be inappropriate. The Admiralty deprecated anything tending to make officers afloat, or at the Admiralty, play for safety. The Formidable, Hogue, Crecy, and Aboukir were torpedoed by. German . submarines.] i Lord Selborne added that tlie secrecj over naval disasters was bad for tin national temperament. Lord Emmott, First CommiEEioner-q Works, said that there was 110 lawHta. necessitated a court-martial. The mo. tion would take away the Admiralty 1 !' discretion, which ought not to be in> terfered with at present. The. Adinir< alty's action during the war was with* out prejudice to subsequent actions.. Tbfc attendance of officers at a court-martial would seriously interfere with, thi Navy's work. Lord Lansdowne believed that Mz. Churchill's apprehension that officers) would play for safety was a misconception. The oourts-martial could be held in secret to prevent the leakage-of information to the enemy. ■ . The debate was adjourned. - •