NAVAL CADET'S HONOR.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 330, 17 June 1911, Page 10

NAVAL CADET'S HONOR.

CLAIM OF £IO,OOO REFUSED. ARCHER-SHEE CASE AGAIN. The case of Cadet George Archer-Shee, who waa dismissed from the Royal Naval College, Osborne, on a charge of theft of which lie was acquitted by the High Court last summer, waa recently debated in the House of Commons. His father is claiming £IO,OOO damages, but Mr. McKcnna refused to increase his offer of paying Mr. ArcherShee's taxed costs in the High Court proceedings. Mr. Cave outlined the case. It was found, lie said, at tin; Naval College, at Osborne, that a postal order for os had been taken from a locker and sigjied with the cadet's name and cashed at the post office. Suspicion fell on George Ar-cher-Shee, a cadet, and at the request of the authorities he was taken away by his parents. After throe days' trial it became evident to the Admiralty, as it had been apparent to others some months before, that no jury would convict, and they camo to the conclusion that the boy was innocent of the charge. The boys at Osborne held the view all along that no such charge could be supported against j him.

In every case where mistakes were made in Government Departments, it had been the practice for the Governments to redress the wrong unwittingly done, but he thought £IO,OOO was too large a sum to be claimed.

Mr. McKenna: That is the only point,

Mr. Cave said that an expression of regret, and the offer of some substantial sum by way of compensation, and the payment of /ill the costs incurred, would have been a very reasonable offer to make. He thought the claim for £IO,OOO excessive.

Tho Admiralty had made a further mistake, which had in it an element of comedy. After the trial it was found out that a letter had been written to tho boy's parents, saying that the progress he had been making in bis studies had not been entirely satisfactory, and that it might ho necessary to ask him to withdraw from the college after his period of probation. That letter was put forward as a reason for not offering compensation. He understood that as many as 30 such letters were sent in one term. They were meant as a warning, and never led to anything except increased diligence on the part of the lads.

Mr. McKenna said that most of the harm was done in a charge of this sort before it came to the knowledge of the Admiralty. He therefore had amended the regulations, and had issued instructions that no public inquiry should at first be held which would lead to the publicity of the case in respect of a charge against a cadet which would necessitate his being withdrawn from the college if the charge was found true.

The unsatisfactory nature of the boy's studies, although known to him, was never mentioned until he was confronted with a claim for £IO,OOO, and complete indemnity as to costs as the only basis of discussion. That he refused. Such a claim was more than a naval officer would receive after 30 years' service. The boy's chance of remaining in the college was only a half-chance before the real trouble arose. He still held it was a casp for fair and generous treatment, and that the offer to pay all the taxed costs, both of the trial and the inquiry, met the ease.