Januarv 30. 1915. 
LAND AND WATER 
'at present exist, and this war ivill L:: over long before any 
6uch vessel could exist, even suppooing tlic idea to be feasible. 
iWe Lave to fight this war witii oiistiug material. 
'■ One Who Knows." — It is obviously impossible to dis- 
cuss thu cfl5ciency of any subordinate admiral. I have read 
jour letter with much interest. I am not pcrsouallj acquainted 
with the officer mentioned, but I was a frequent visitor on 
board his flagship in a previous command, and I am bound to 
Bay that views expressed about him in the wardroom in no 
■way coincided with yours. He may have "gone oS " since; 
but I am afraid that I should require more evidence than tlie 
etatcmcnts of an anonymous correspondent before 1 would 
suggest any such thing in these oolunms. It is obvious that 
you have inside knowledge of the naval service, but — so have 1 1 
Other raatlers apart, don't you think that I'd be v.hat the 
Americans call " some cad " to attack a naval officer on 
evidence eciu anonymously, even granting that all you allege 
yiiixu quite true? 
E. il. (Hatoh End), and various others. — I appreciate 
your fccntiiiients, but I think you are quite wrong. I have 
dealt with the gubject in the body of my article this week, as 
I think it is certainly one of supreme importance. If my 
arguments do not satisfy you, I shall be extremely obliged if 
you -will write again to the editor for publication, because I 
for one am firmly convinced that this question of the 
Admiralty and the public is a matter of far greater moment 
tlian the submarining of a battleship or two. As I have said, 
I think critics of tha Admiralty are incorrect; but there exists 
the old story of the danger of sitting on the safety-valve, 
and I trust that you will understand that, absolultly unsym- 
pathetic though I am to your arguments, I do realise that the 
underlying motive/'of your criticisms are entirely patriotic, 
and on that account v.ortliy of appreciation and commenda- 
tion, on which you will, 1 hope, forgive me if I 6uggc.<!t the 
possibility that 1 know more about the inside and unwritten 
history of the naval war than you do I From the King to the 
errand boy, we are all of us engaged in a struggle for national 
existence. This being so, views naturally vary widely; but 
no one outsido a lunatic asylum would seek to grind an axe. 
Did I think that th© Admiralty was v.roiig I iliould assuredly 
assert it in no uncertain words. 
M. H. S. (Reading). — I do not believe in the German 
"super-submarines." intended to attack British commerco 
on the high seas. They have also been hoard of as intended 
to transport an invading army to our shores. The reason 
for my scepticism is, that if they had euch craft the Germans 
would have been careful to observe absolute secrecy about 
them. 
L. M. M. (Edinburgh). — Thank you for your letter, 
which I am ansvrering privately. The contents are better not 
published. 
A. C. (Hamilton).— You will see that I have already dealt 
this week with one of the questions raised by you The reat 
I will — so far &a possible — refer to in my next week's notcB. 
THE ACTION OFF THE FALKLANDS. 
AS DESCRIBED BY AN OFFICER ON THE "INVINCIBLE." 
NOTE.— Thii ArticI* hti been tabmltted to th« Preii Boreao, which doei Dot object to th« pablication ai centored, anl takei no 
retpsBtibility for the correctaeti of the itatementt. 
ing of Scliarnhont, Gnciscnau, Leiir.ig, ^'urnlerg and Dret- 
dtn were there. \Ye, of course, could hardly believe our luck, 
as this was the very squadron that we had come oat to destroy, 
and they had come to find us instead of we them (of course, 
it was obvious that they did not know that the Invincible and 
Inflexible -v/ere with the fleet), and their rc.-ison for coming 
was to destroy our coal and wireless station. 
At about 10 a.m. we left harbour, having got steam for 
full speed. Directly the enemy saw us they turned round and 
went away at full speed— they were then about 14 miles away. 
The disposition was then as in Plan 2. 
The Kent, Glasgow, and Carnarvon were .going under 24 
knots, and therefor© we had to reduce speed to keep them 
with us; we were, however, slowly overtaking the enemy. 
The enemy altered course, and we were nearly right astern 
chasing them, as in Plan 3. 
,.^" 
t riif^exlbie 
nth 
jlj v^s 
^?. Stanley 
-. 'i 
I EXPECT by now you have heard all the news about th« 
sinking of the Scharnhorst, Gnetsenau, Leipzig and 
Niirnberg. Anyhow, as all censorship is removed I 
will tell you as much as possible of the action and 
events leading up to it. The situation was more or 
Ichs as follows: — 
On Monday, December 7th, we arrived at Port Stanley in 
the Falkland Islands and prepared for coaling. The Canoput 
battleship was installed there as guard ship. The ships, there- 
fore, in Port Stanley on December 7th were Invincible, In- 
flejiblc, Carnarvon, Cornwall, Kent, Glasgow, and Bristol and 
Mactdonia. . . . 
At 7.30 a.m. on December 8th we started coijling, we 
being anchored in Port Stanley ("we" being us and In- 
yiexi-ljle). Kent and Cornwall and Bristol had finished, Glasgow 
■W.13 doing repairs. At about 8 a.m. signal etation reported 
q four-funnelled warship iln sight, and then shortly afterwards 
a light cruiser. These were recognised as either the Scharn- 
horst or Gneiserum and the Nurnberg. We immediately gave 
orders' to the fleet to raise steam for full speed. The Kent, 
ConiwaU -nnd Glasgow proceeded out almost at once, and 
Bigu.'iHed the movements of the enemy to us from tJie entrance. 
The Canopus opened fire with her 12-inoh guns from her moor- 
ings. 
■ Tli« enemy. were then reported to be retiring, but were 
later rep»i't>ed t-o be. waiting furtlier off, having been joined by 
tlirco ships.. We then knew that the whole squadron, consut- 
i! 
'(melsenau.^ 
1)resd£2t \ 
limits 
I Seat llriv'^lble 
"^tGksg^ow I Inflexible 
i Coniwall 
I Caniarvoti 
ii» 
