THE FLIGHT O F THE ‘ GOEBEN ’ AND THE ‘ B RESLAU ’ The ‘ ’ Flight o f the G oeben ‘ ’ and the B r eslau An Episode i n Naval BY S A B RK LEY M LN B DMI RAL m . r . A E E I E, ma n. LONDON EVELEIGH NASH CO MPANY LIMITED PREFACE F TE R u a 1920 of A the p blic tion in March , , “ the Official History of the War ' Nav al I u . Operations, Vol . by Sir J lian S I Corbett, represented to the First Lord of the Admiral ty that the book contained u u serio s inacc racies , and made a formal request that the Admiralty should take action in the matter . As the Admiralty did not think proper to accede to my u I u u s req est, have tho ght it right to p bli h f the ollowing narrative . ERKE LE Y I LNE . A . B M Admi ral . Jan uary 1921 . CONT ENT S PREFACE I . OFFI CI AL RESPONSIB IL ITY I I . THE SITU ATION IN JU LY 1914 PRELIMINARY DISPOSITIONS THE FRENCH DISPOSITIONS FI M G W V . RST EETIN ITH GOEB EN NE W DISPOSITIONS “ ” THE OFF ICIAL VERSION GOEB EN AND B RESLA U AT MESSINA SECOND MEETING WITH GOEB EN AND FURTHER D IS POS ITIONS XI . THE MIS TAKEN TELEGRAM THE S EARCH RES UMED THE ES CAPE L XI V . THE S E'UE XV . CONCLUS ION OFFICIAL RESP ONS IBILITY I OFF ICI AL RE S P ONS IB ILITY u u ffi I N j stice to the p blic, to the O cers r u and men who se ved nder my command , own u I u and to my rep tation, have tho ght it right to publish the following narrative Of the events in the Mediterranean imme diat ely preceding and following upon the u W o tbreak Of war, concerning hich there u u has been, and is , some nfort nate mis apprehension . Du s ring the war, when ecrecy with to n regard naval Operations was ecessary, it was natural that the public anxiety u find u S ho ld expression in conject res , and ul I that false impressions sho d prevail . select the following passages from Hansard as examples ' Hansard (House of Com mons 313i Jul 1 916 E c ) , y, . s ape Of the Goeben reslau and B (Despatches) . 11 1 2 FLIGHT OF THE GOEREN Commander B ell airs asked the Fi rst o o of L rd f the Admiralty, in view the fact that the disasters Of the Dardanelles and the Baghdad advance are about t o be u W inq ired into by Commissions , hether he is aware that the entry Of Turkey into the War originated in the esca pe Of the Goeben and Breslau from Messina to the Dar danelles in August 1 91 4 and Whether he can now publish the despatches dealing with the matter, together with the dis positions Of Ships of which the Board Of Admiralty have expressed their approval ' Dr . Macnamara The Admiralty have hitherto only published despatches which u deal with act al engagements , and not ’ reports on the disposal of His Majesty s or ships , whether not those dispositions succeeded in bringing about an engage hon ment . My right . friend (the First al u to Lord , Mr . B fo r), does not propose - depart from this well established practice . He must not be as sumed as giving unqual i ed u o ho fi conc rrence to the view f my n. OFFICIAL RES PONS IB ILITY 1 8 and gallant friend that the entry Of Tu rkey into the War originated with the arrival tw o n Of these ships at Consta tinople . 12th March, 191 9 . Mr . H . Smith asked the First Lord of the Admiralty Whether he Will lay u pon the Table Of the House the Repo rt of the proceedings of the Court Of Inquiry which inquired into the circu mstances attending Goeben reslau the escape Of the and B , and which acquitted Admiral Sir Berkeley Milne Of all respo nsibility therefo r ' AS Dr . Macnamara ' stated in reply to r a question by my hon . f iend the Member or u on 26th f Portsmo th North , the u no u u Was Febr ary, Co rt of Inq iry held in the case of Admiral Sir Berkeley Milne . The Admiralty issued a statement on the 3 u u 1 91 4 f oth A g st, , to the ef ect that z The conduct and dispositions of Admiral Sir Berkeley Milne in regard to the German vessels Gaaban and Breslau have been the subject of the careful 1 4 FLIGHT OF THE GOEREN of l examination Of the Board Admira ty , with the result that their Lordships have approved the measures taken by him in ’ all respects . These , and other perfectly correct state G on u ments Of the overnment the s bject , not did , however, serve to dispel the misapprehensions t o which I refer . The Government have consistently refused to publish the documents concern ing the openi ng of the war in the Mediter ranean us , the reason for their ref al being that the history of the affai r woul d be related in the Official History Of the u r war, in preparation by Sir J lian Co bett . 1 5th 1 920 On the November, , for instance , the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty stated in the House of Commons so u u that, far as the near f t re is concerned, it is not proposed to publish the docu ments in regard t o the escape Of the Goeben the matter had already been dealt with in the Naval History of the ’ W r a . OFFICIAL RES PONS IB ILITY 1 5 It was , therefore , to be expected that the facts of the episode in questio n would be impartially set fo rth in the Official W r History of the a ' Naval Operations , Vol . I . u by Sir Jul ian S . Corbett, , p blished 920 in March 1 . u fi That expectation has not been f l lled . Nor have the Admiralty thought proper to take any action to correct the erroneous r own imp ession which , in my view, is disengaged by the Official historian ’ s pre ntati on of . se the case Indeed , a reference of u to the statement Sir James Craig, q oted above , shows that the Admiralty profess t o regard the account Of the matter written by Sir Julian Corbett as an exact version of ’ the documents upon which the historian s of u version them was fo nded . It is not a u find t o concl sion I myself able accept . If, writing as an independent historian, Sir Julian Corbett was impelled to criticise the conduct of the naval Operations by fi the of cers in command Of them, I should ea ro hold that the Admirals at s , being p 1 6 FLIGHT OF THE GOEB EN fessional r seamen, were p obably better able to judge Of the requirements Of the S u u on it ation than an amate r shore , and the matter woul d resolve itself into a f B ut simple dif erence Of Opinion . the so m case is not si ple as that . Neither the Co mmittee Of Imperial Defence nor the Admiralty can be absolved from a definite share in the responsibility for the fi Of cial History . The First Lo rd Of the Admiralty stated on 1 8th u r 1 920 a ffi Febr a y, , th t the O cial History is being co mpiled under the di recti on of the Commi ttee of I mperi al e enc ar 1 8th u D f e (Hans d , Febr ary, The same statement was made by the Parliamentary Secretary t o the Admiralty on 2 h o r 1 920 n . 7t Oct be , (Ha sard) The Prime Minister informed the House t o er 1 920 of Commons on l s N vemb , , that or u r a Sir Jul ian C bett, I nde st nd , is writing the Official account Of the war lt oi nt o vi ew n r from the Admi ra y p f (Ha sa d , l st November, 1 8 FLIGHT OF THE GOEREN u u of appearing in yo r iss e this month , your contributor gives the weight of his name to a widely prevailing impression u t o rr which I wo ld beg leave co ect . Referring to the Official Naval His ’ of War u for tory the , as the main so rce of the facts the case, he says , As regards this incident , it has evidently been heavily ’ u censored . That s ch an impression is u but nat ral , I do not deny, it is entirely u untr e . I was given the freest possible access to the secret files which contain the telegrams that passed between the al Admiralty and the Admir , as well as u o to the instr cti ns, logs and the rest , and from these sources a narrative was con u t o of str cted the best my ability . After bei ng tested for accuracy of detai l by seni or o icers who were en a ed i n the o erati ons fi g g p , u m t o r it was s b itted the Admi alty, and , t u n o u af er caref l exami ati n, ret rned to wi th a ew su esti ons as to me , f gg the di n o certai n assa es o wor g f p g .