LETTER TO THE HONORABLE ALLEN W. DULLES FROM LIVINGSTON T. MERCHANT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 38
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 14, 2003
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: June 21, 1960
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE
FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS
WASHINGTON
June 21, 1960
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Dear Allen:
Many thanks for letting me read the file
on the Crabb case, which I return herewith.
I found it most interesting reading, with
some interesting parallels for debate to the one
we have recently witnessed here.
Sincerely,
Livingston T. Merchant
Enclosure:
Stated.
The Honorable
Allen W. Dulles, Director,
Central Intelligence Agency.
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
a CATIS 7A --C Pif-RbP186B01-67,6Reogge4Tooe-3-' ' s,
Approved For Rel i tO -2-. ': -I
i
i
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Mr. Dulles:
You were inquiring whether or not the British actually published
the text of its note to the Soviet Union in which it apologized for the
Crabb incident. We have not been able to locate a specific text put
out by the British Foreign Office, but it does appear from the
following newspaper material that they did, in fact, release the
text of their note.
The first texts of the two notes published in the press were
in the London Times of 12 May. The London Times published the text
of both the U.S.S.R. and British notes but attributed them to Reuters
pickup of the Tess announcement. However, on 13 May, the New York
Times, in publishing the text of the British note, prefaced it with
the following statement. "The Foreign Office today published the text
of the following note sent to the U.S.S.R. apologizing for the Crabb
frogman incident." In addition, the New York Herald Tribune of 13
May in an AP dispatch stated, "A British Foreign Office spokesman today
said that the U.S.S.R. had violated diplomatic usage by publishing th...
text of the British note to the U.S.S.R. in the Crabb ease. Admitting
officially that the apology had been made, he said/nevertheless, it 13
customary for a country to publish only the texts of its own notes."
'FMC
9 June 1960
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27:
Volume 552
No. 150
P80601 676R000900070003-5
Wednesday
9th May, 1956
PARLIAMENTARY
DEBATES
(HANSARD)
-HOUSE OF COMMONS
OFFICIAL REPORT
CONTENTS
TUESDAY, 8th MAY, 1956
[Continuation of Proceedings]
RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES BILL [Col. 11671:
Considered in Committee
WEDNESDAY, 9th MAY, 1956
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS:
Differential Speed Limit (London Traffic Area) [Col. 1223]
COMMANDER CRABB (PRESUMED DEATH) [Col. 1226] :
The Prime Minister's Statement
FINANCE (No. 2) BILL [Col. 1233] :
Read a Second Time
WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS:
Gibraltar (Constitutional Reform)
LONDON
HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE
NINEPENCE1 NET
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02f27 :.CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Members who wish to have the Daily Report of the Debates
forwarded to them should give notice at the Vote Office.
The Bound Volumes will also be sent to Members who similarly
express their desire to have them.
No proofs of the Daily Reports can be supplied, nor can corrections
be made in the Weekly Edition. Corrections which Members
suggest for the Bound Volume should be clearly marked in the
Daily Report, but not telephoned, and the copy containing the
corrections must be received at the Editor's Room, House of
Commons
not later than
Monday, 14th May, 1956
STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT
GREATLY FACILITATES THE
PROMPT PUBLICATION
OF THE VOLUMES
Members may obtain excerpts of their Speeches from the Official
Report (within one month from the date of Publication),
on application to the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office,
go the Editor of the Official Report, House of Commons,
from whom the terms and conditions of reprinting may be
ascertained. Application forms are available at the Vote Office.
PRICES AND SUBSCRIPTION RATES
DAILY PARTS
Single copies:
Commons, 9d. (by post 11d.); Lords, 9d. (by post IOW.).
Annual subscriptions:
Commons, ?5 10s. Oct.; Lords, ?4; Both Houses, 1.8 17s. 6d.
Short period subscriptions to cover 40 consecutive daily issues:
Commons or Lords, El 10s. Od.
WEEKLY HANSARD
Single copies:
Commons, 2s. (by post 2s. 6d.); Lords, Is. 6d. (by post Is. 8d.).
Annual subscriptions:
Commons, L4 ? including Index, E4 17s. 6d. .
Lords, ?2 15s. Od.; including Index, ?3 7s. 6d.
Index?Single copies:
Commons, 6d. (by post 714.); Lords, 4d. (by post 514.).
Annual subscriptions: Commons, El. ; Lords, 15s.
BOUND VOLUMES of Debates are issued periodically during the
session. There is no fixed subscription rate, but prices will be
quoted and standing orders entered on application.
THE INDEX to each Bound Volume of House of Commons Debates,
which may be used in conjunction with the corresponding Daily
Parts and Weekly Hansard, is published separately at 2s. (by post
2s. 2d.) and can be supplied to standing order.
All subscription rates are Inclusive of postage.
PAINTBD AND PUBLIALMb BY HER mAJPINTY'il ITATICINON tiff/melt
To be purchased from
York House, Kingsway, LONDON w.c.2 423 Oxford Street, LONDON, %V.1
P.O. Box 569, LONDON, S.E.1
I3a Castle Street, EniNnivaGit, 2 109 St. Mary Street, CARDIFF
39 King Street, MANCIIESTER, 2 Tower Lane, BRISTOL, 1
2 Edmund Street, BIRMINGHAM, 3 80 Chichester Street, BELFAsT
or from any Bookseller
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
2_. Comma
"%Al-lough the Co
4.1?1 1,ondon, I c
speed Hr
lite rest of the
c4i:ts lilting the loca
,orlie; Interested b
:egard recon
to tre sp ial .pee
t`_1_4 the Committed
-; -,,idltions othe
J.1.,..-1 h ye to he b
,..:? I. : tke'th.e_Corr
ern,idering tfiTh
ntmendation
Lkt7 it that a m:
: W Is not requi;
the American
1,, but I will gi
.: n.ysibility of ad
-rs-:.o umits. I do
DiLie
ti, to adopt
traffic lane
i:tingly end())
ir - ultmendation /2f
f".on of pedes
Niii: fe.tr this 'n mi
(
/ 7 ti p ocra me.
thserib to tin_
5,), :=I (Pon l that
!.'!' " " tra lc shot
to bb?e
'11,? s howeve ,
VI 7- ,,vn and Cour
rtp.et to direct lot
r,!tt s:-_, ?Iermission ft
t t ; k loads, but I
r2,pert of county r
5,) t Propose to
r 0- ,tr,n, Friend th
I_ 0_ t! t ,overnment t
4so accept ti
fp-tie- studies shot
to l 1 re discipline, tl
tl... .. n rot of speed
tri: ;71 ossings and
rt,e- 1,.
t isto noted the (
ti thu production o
8,?sc'tunt Hind
T) ) riq.ilt hon. Frit
th-, :h.:re would
Cy .,:islit of the mi
h.! raise the sr
v,iiii,ies from 20 t,
e Watkinson
crt=. tl-,
One-%
Lime Grove
Mr. Tomne
Tt---ii)ort and Ci
extkcis to be able
rc.g..?-A:, to a unilat
Shepl
'Noise!'
Pow,. = .11s me tha
32
'bates
milady
ections
embers
in. the
!Mg the
wise qf
Official
cation),
Office,
rn o ns,
may be
e Office.
. 6d.
issues:
s. 8d.).
ing the
will be
)ebates,
g Daily
by post
'Approved For Release 2003/02/27: CIA-RDP80601676R00090007.00Q3-5
3225 Commander Crabb 9 MAY 1956 (Presumed oratm 1226
FFICS
.ONDON, W.1
IFF
FAST
Although the Committee was only concerned
with London, I consider. the principle of a
40 m.p.h. speed limit ttf be equally applicable
to the rest of the cotbstry. I am, therefore,
consulting the localefuthority associations and
other interested odies.
As regard recommendation 14, which refers
to the spyKal speed limits for vehicles, I note
that the (Committee recognises there are many
consider lions other than those of traffic flow
k
wtstlt o h 0 Id 1/0 borpe in mind: .I. will, h
ever, taket heSommittee's views snto ac
in considering thii Mica lem.
Recommendations 16-22 (Gen-ral tters).
I accept that a maximum spee limit on all
roads is not required. I do t propose to
copy the American system of p ima facie speed
limits, but I will give furthesI consideration to
the possibility of adopting tlfe idea of "zonal"
speed limits. -I do not infend, at least for the
present, to adopt different speed limits for
different traffic lanes,dn the same road.
I strongly endarce the view expressed in
recommendation/20 regarding the physical
separation of pedestrians from the traffic, and
will bear this An mind in regard to the current
road progra
I subscrib
rnendation
Through tra
quently to b
land is, how'
ve
the Town and Country
power to direct local plannt
? refuse permission for develop
trunk roads, but I can only
respect of ccomty roads if cal
so. I propose to draw the
right hon. Friend the Ministe
Local Government to this r
experiment with one way working in
Lime Grove and Pennard Road .n the
next few weeks. My right hon. Friend
will ask the London and Home counties
Traffic Advisory Committee to celsider.
in the light-9f that experiment, Whether
any restr. 6ns on waiting are desirable.
me.
to the view expressed in recom-
1 that roads specially built for
c should not be allowed subse-
ome built-up. Development of
'ect to the provisions of
ing Acts. I have
authorities to
cnt adjacent to
give advice in
cd upon to do
ttention of my
of Housing and
ommendation.
I also accept the rec
further studies should b
to lane discipline, the u
the control of speed, th
trian crossings and th
meters.
I have noted the Co mittee's views in regard
to the production of igh-powered cars.
Viscount Hinch oighrooke : Now that
my right hon. Frie d has assured himself
that there would IN no material adverse
criticism of the incr-Ise in speed as such,
will he raise the speel unit of commercial
vehicles from 20 to 30 -k.p.h.?
Mr. Watkinson: Tha is a different
question.
mendations, that
made with regard
of traffic lights for
approaches to pedes-
accuracy of speedo-
One-Way W
Lime Grove?Pe
56. Mr. Tomney as
Transport and Civil
expects to be able t
regard to a unilater
Lime Grove, Sheph
Mr. Molskin :
Police tells ma tha
32 IC 32
rking,
nard Road
ed the Minister of
Aviation when he
make a decision in
I parking system in
ds Bush, W.12.
he Commissioner of
he proposes to try an
COMMANDER CRABB
(PRESUMED DEATH)
The Prime Minister (Sir Acithonv
Eden): With your permission. Mi.
Speaker, and that of the House. I will
make a statement on the subject raised
by Question No. 9.
It would not be in the public nterest
to disclose the circumstances in which
Commander Crabb is presumed to have
met his death.
While it is the practice for Ministers
to accept responsibility I think it neces-
sary, in the special circumstances of this
case, to make it clear that what was done
was done without the authority or the
knowledge of Her Majesty's M.nisters
Appropriate disciplinary steps ar.! being
taken.
Mr. Dugdale: Is the Prime Minister
aware that that is one of the mast extra-
ordinary statements made by a Prime
Minister in the House of Commons and
that, whatever he may say to the cmtrary,
it is a complete evasion of Miaisterial
responsibility? May I ask hini one or
two questions? Whether he will answer
them or not appears doubtful. First, why
was Commander Crabb diving in tile
close vicinity of the Soviet cruiser which
was here on a friendly visit? secondly,
why, and under whose authority, was a
police officer sent to the hotel 'at which
Commander Crabb was staying, and why
did he order the leaves to be tern from
the register showing the names both a
Commander Crabb and of the nian with
whom he stayed? Further, what was the
name of that other man and why did the
police officer threaten the hotel keepei
with action under the Official Secrets Act
if he did not allow that to be done?
The Prime Minister: I thought it righr.
to make the statement which I have matte
to the House, and I have nothing to add
to it.
Mr. Gaitskell : Is the Prime Ministe-
aware that a great deal of information
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02727 :..C.IALRDP80B6676R000900070003-5
1223 Oral Answers
9 MAY 1956 Oral Answers
shortly a er the Transport (Disposal of
Road Ha lage Property) Bill becomes
law.
Mr. Davies Will the Minister ask the
Road Haulage Disposal Board to in-
chide in its final udit a statement as to
the number of veh les out of service for
maintenance or rep, ir at the time the
audit is made? The mister, as the Par-
liamentary Secretary 11 know, has in-
timated that 7f per ce . is the figure.
We understand that it is greater than
that.
Mr. Molson : I believe it is he inten-
tion of the Board to do that, t I will
certainly ask it to do so.
/224
started in London, where I am the traffic
authority. I regard it largely as an ex-
periment to see whether this differential
speed limit on the edge of large tow
will help the flow of traffic?
Mr. Isaacs: Does it mean that o roads
where there is now a speed lint' of 30
miles an hour traffic will be abl to tr,'vel
at 40 miles an hour, or does it ean that
unrestricted roads will have speed limit
imposed on them of 40 mil an hour?
Mr. Watkinson: The mit can move
either way. The ex riment will be
carried out, which wi mean that some
roads with a prese limit of 30 miles
an hour will have e limit increased to
40 miles an ho , and on some roads
which are unre ricted the limit will be
40 miles an ur. But the principle is
that round e periphery of big towns
we shall tr to get a better flow of traffic
by havin a two-stage limit. m
Folio, g is the statement:
Differential Speed Limit, Londo
Traffic Area
55. Mr. Partridge asked the Minist
of Transport and Civil Aviation whethe
he is now able to make a statement about
the recently published Report of the
London and Home Counties Traffic Ad-
visory Committee on the 30 miles-per-
hour speed limit in the London traffic
area.
Mr. Watkinson: Yes, Sir. I have de-
cided to accept the main recommenda-
tions of the Committee. I propose
introduce a new differential speed 1. lit
of 40 m.p.h. on suitable lengths of oad
in the London traffic area as soon s the
views of the local authorities par cularly
concerned have been recei d and
considered.
? My right hon. Friend the ecretary of
State for Scotland also pr poses to dis-
cuss with the local autho ty associations
and .ot!ier bodies in Scotland those
matters of general atelication raised in
the Report.
I am circulatin a fuller statement in
the OFFICIAL RE ORT.
Mr. Partrid : May I ask my right
hon. Friend ow soon he expects to put
thlu new fferentlal speed limit into
force? y I further ask whether this
is to be garded as an experiment before
being plied generally throughout the
countr ?
M . Watkinson: How soon will depend
?on ow long it takes to get the views
of the local authorities, and of course
I am anxious to carry them with me.
to the general scheme, it will be
32 RApproved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDID G76R000900070
lusions on the detailed recommenda-
Ho of the Committee:
omtnendations 1-8 (Built-up area speed
it). I agree that the 30 m.p.h. speed limit
n bui -up areas is fundamentally sound and
should e retained. On balance I consider it
should r nain in force for 24 hours a day. I
also agree hat in future on trunk and classified
roads the imit should not automatically be
extended by he provision of new street lighting,
and a Claus to effect this is already in the
Road Traffic ill.
Provisions ar also in the Bill which would
permit the use repeater signs where there
are no street la , as recommended by the
Committee. As re ards improving the lighting
of speed limit sig the revised traffic sign
Regulations, circulat -(1 in draft for comment
last year, would go s me way towards meeting
this recommendation, ut I propose to pursue
the matter further wit the responsible local
authorities.
Recommendations 9- (Differential speed
limit). I accept the argi erns, supported by
the majority of the Co mittee, for a new
speed limit of 40 m.p.h. on suitable lengths of
main road, which, I belie -, will contribute
both to road safety and to the better observance
of speed limas generally, am _proceeding,
therefore, to seek the vies or the local
authorities in whose areas He t e lengths pro-
posed for 40 m.p.h. speed limits 'n Appendices
2 and 3.
I hope all local authorities in he London
traffic area will collaborate with in intro-
ducing at the earliest possible mom):Int a well
considered and consistent pattern of thse speed
limits. No legislation is required. I shall keep
these lengths closely under review and, when
sufficient experience has been gained. I propose
to ask the views of the Departmental Road
Safety Committee on thedgAs
1 Comma,
has already been
about this matter
il
o r.,:tlection, in
Nreculation which
ttioe !n the absei
from the Governr
ma.: "It will in
rill!? hon. Friend
01- t really woul
gefieral interest, if
givc n?
I th! Prime Mini
rght hon. Gentler
the f rifest conside
I c' vso assure hi
issues which are tf
Prime Minister hi
thi.; Al reflection
the n:ormation at
it my duty, as I
House the Answer 1m
I nu tell the Hot
the A tswer I have
Mr. Gaitskell : I
av..,re ;hat that a
sa'htautory? Is 114
whui. a!I of us wc
public security, t
inc iitt arise that
a sf; t( ment on th
much in the interest
to hide very gray
occ ur-ed
The Prime Minist
the country must dr
from what I have sai(
" ill."]?of cc
what t have declinec
any rizt t hon. Gentle
that have weighed
tions ;J.Id they Weil
Ansucr I have given.
as right hon. Gen
expTwo% know?th
sions itch only a
take t rut am convit
careful reflection, that
taken
A.1', the right a
Mr. Caitskell : Are
it thm in the absence (
merit from the Prim(
the !ight of what he 1
the prOlic drawing the
officers \s ere engaged,
Majes?'y'. Forces was
busireci 'Nf espionage
visit?
003-5 IK 33
er3 1224
I am the traffic
.gely as an ex-
this differential
of large tow
:?
n that o roads
cd lim of 30
e abl to travel
es It Dean that
e speed limit
jlfr an hour?
mit can move
iment will be
,can that some
it of 30 miles
it increased to
)n some roads
limit will be
he principle is
of big towns
flow of traffic
it.
ppromy For Memyer2c0m0a/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
9 MAY 1956 (Presumed Death) 1228
ent :
recommenda-
It-up area speed
k.p.h. speed limit
itally sound and
nce I consider it
hours a day. I
ink and classified
iutomatically be
iw street lighting,
s already in the
'Jill which would
gns where there
mended by the
ving the lighting
ised traffic sign
ift for comment
towards meeting
?opose to pursue
?esponsible local
ifferential speed
ts, supported by
tee, for a new
itable lengths of
will contribute
ietter observance
am Proceeding,
of the local
t e lengths pro-
ts n Appendices
in he London
ith r??n intro-
mom pt a well
n of th se speed
-A I shall keep
view and, when
,ained, I propose
,artmental Road
Its.
has already been published in the Press
about this matter? Does he not think,
on reflection, in view of the amount of
speculation which undoubtedly will con-
tinue in the absence of any information
from the Government?[An Hort. MEM-
BER: "It will increase."]?and, as my
right hon. Friend has said, will increase,
that it really would he wiser, and hi Lao
general Interest, if a full explanation were
given?
The Prime Minister: I can assure the
right hon. Gentleman that I have given
the fullest consideration to this platter.
I can also assure him that there are certain
issues which are the responsibility of the
Prime Minister himself. Having given
this all reflection and having given all
the information at our disposal. I thought
it my duty, as I have said, to give the
House the Answer that I have given; and
I must tell the House that I cannot vary
the Answer I have given.
Mr. Gaitskell : Is the Prime Minister
aware that that answer is totally un-
satisfactory? Is he further aware that
while all of us would wish to protect
public security, the suspicion must
inevitably arise that his refusal to make
?a statement on this subject is not so
much in the interest of public security as
to hide a very grave blunder which has
occurred.
The Prime Minister: The House and
the country must draw their conclusions
from what I have said--[Hort. MEMBERS:
?" They will."]?of course, and also from
? what I have declined to say. Naturally,
any right hon. Gentleman will understand
that I have weighed all these considera-
tions; and they weighed heavily in the
Answer I have given. But I repeat?and
as right hon. Gentlemen, with their
experience, know?there are some deci-
sions which only a Prime Minister can
take and I am convinced, after the most
careful reflection, that the decision I have
taken was the right and the only one.
Mr. Gaitskell : Are we really to take
it that in the absence of any further state-
ment from the Prime Minister, and in
the light of what he has just said about
the public drawing their own conclusions,
officers were engaged, or an officer of Her
MaieSty's Forces was engaged, on the
business of espionage during the Russian
visit?
32 IC 33
The Prime Minister The right hon.
Gentleman, if I may say so with rt spect.
is perfectly entitled to put any wording
he likes upon what I have said. My
words stand as they were. without any
gloss that anyone could put on them.
Mr. Shinwell : The right hon. Cattle-
man has hit told it McRae Ilia ha
proposes to take disciplinary ti:tion.
Those were his words. Will he be good
enough to say against whom he is ,;.Aking
disciplinary action, and for what reason
he is taking this disciplinary action"
The Prime Minister: No, Sir. What I
have said in my statement was thal dis-
ciplinary steps are being taken. 'flat is
so.
Mr. Shinwell : Would the right hon.
Gentleman be good enough to enlirhten
hon. Members on this matter? Against
whom is he taking disciplinary steps?
Is it against an individual, or individuals,
who gave instructions to Commander
Crabb? Against whom is the action
being taken and for what reason is he
taking action? Is it because they defied
authority, or is it because they acted lvith-
out consulting Her Majesty's Ministers?
What is the reason for the action?
The Prime Minister: I have nothing to
add to the Answer I have given.
Mr. Dugdale: In view of the Govern-
ment's most unsatisfactory Answer, I beg
leave to move the Adjournment of the
House under Standing Order No. CI to
call attention to a definite matt& of
urgent public importance, namely, the
failure of Her Majesty's Governmen, to
give a satisfactory explanation to the
country about the events connected With
the disappearance of Commander Crabb.
Mr. Speaker: The right hon. Member
asks leave to move the Adjournment of
the House under Standing Order N. 9
to call attention to a definite matter of
urgent public importance, namely,, the
failure of Her Majesty's Government to
give a satisfactory explanation to the
country about the events connected with
the disappearance of Commander Crabb.
This application is covered by autho-
rity. When a Minister refuses to answer
a Question on the grounds of public ,n-
terest it has been ruled in the past?and
I adhere to it myself?that that is a
matter which cannot be raised under the
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 206/02T27 CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
)229 Cypriots (Death Sentences) 9 MAY 1956
[MR. SPEAKER.]
Standing Order. Therefore. I must
decline to admit the right hon. Member's
application.
Mr. Wigg: With respect, Sir, the Ques-
tion was tabled for answer by the First
Lord of the Admiralty. It really was a
matter for him because a naval establish-
ment had been used. The Prime
Minister's reply makes that quite clear.
It would, therefore, appear to be an
abuse of the rules of the House that the
Minister, who, clearly, has a responsi-
bility in this matter, passes it to the
Prime Minister, not, Mr. Speaker, in the
interests of the country, but of the
political interests of the Government.
Mr. Speaker: Order. There is no
point in that at all. The Prime Minister
is quite entitled to answer the Question.
CYPRIOTS (DER
S NCCS
Mr. Fenner BrockWny : I am sorry to
delay the House, r. Speaker, but I want
to ask your rmission to move the
Adjournment o the House on another
matter, of whiclNave given you notice.
I ask permission, u nding Order
No. 9, to move the Adjourn ent of the
House on a definite matter of urgent
public importance, namely, e ecision of
the Governor of Cyprus o intain the
execution of two Cypr ?syt e effect of
which may be di astrous to the
furtherance of a pep ful settlement.
May I say, Sir, th, I am aware of the
rule of the House hich says that we
, must not discuss e fate of men sen-
tenced to death b o er a reprieve
is granted or the executio takes place.
I wish to raise this matte not primarily
because of the fate o the men, but
because of the serious 'fleets that it will
have in Cyprus i relation to the
furtherance of a sett ment there.
Mr. Speaker i Th hurt: ilerriber asks
permission under Sta u ing Order No. 9
to move the Adjourn= t of the House
on a definite matter of urgent public
importance, namely, the ? ecision of the
Governor of Cyprus t maintain the
execution of two Cypriot., the effects of
which may be disastrous to the further-
ance of a peaceful settl ent.
The hon. Member wa good enough
Applot4tIlfdritsini la5/61112.74
32 K 34
Cypriots (Death Sentences) 1230
the House which prevents the House from
discussing on the Adjournment or other-
wise a sentence of 41,errtir:? - ?
tion. It is an old-established cu is of
the House.
A very clear and co ered Ruling on
this matter was give, ? y my predecessor
in the Chair on 10 March, 1947. when
dealing with anothe ?lefila ? ; - - hat
clearly lays down the practice of he
House, by which I am bound, th such
a matter cannot be raise on the
Adjournment of the Hou
With regard to the er matters which
the hon. Member ttaches to this, the
really definite m er is that of the capital
sentences. T other matters are not
definite or ur nt. Therefore, I am bound
by the rule ef the House to decline to
find that thi comes within the Standing
Order.
Mr. Shinwe : I was under the impres-
sion, Mr. Spea , that the rule to which
you have just re red, which is familiar
to hon. Members, ? ?lied almost exclu-
sively in the case whe the Home Secre-
tary is involved; that is say, in a case
where a civilian in this cou try has been
sentenced to death and is at the point of
execution. Obviously, the atter cannot
be raised in such an insta e.
Surely this is a quit different matter.
This is a _ matter , uite outside the
Prerogative or juris ction of the Home
Secretary. It is a atter concerning the
action taken by a 45 ernor, who, pre-
sumably is responsible .-r to the
Colonial Secretary or to Her ajesty's
Government as a whole. Sur in those
circumstances the rule does no pply.
Mr. Speaker: If the right hon. entle-
man will consult the Ruling of
decessor to which I have referr ? ?that
was a colonial case?he wil find the
argument which he has Pu before the
House and before me d alt with and
rejected. The real poin is that it is a
question of the Royal Pr rogative. Insofar
as the Secretary of Staid pr tlig COlunies
has any responsibility fo dvising Her
Majesty as to any residuary'Prerogative
which she may have in the. atter he
is in exactly the samet posit/on as the
Home Secretary would be ad it been
the case of a capital sentenc of a subject
in this country.
Mr. J. Griffiths: While 1being aware of
andCIA_RaDpppr8ecoiBatoinig the R
u6Roon ng9oowoh7iochooy375
Pre-
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R0009000T000.3-5
-BB 12- USSR INTERNATIONAL AJUBS
May 14, 1956
U.K. ANSWERS USSR NTE ON FROGMAN CASE
Moscow, Soviet Home Service, May 11, 1956, 2028 GMT--L
(Text)
Exchange of notes between the USSR Embassy in London and the Foreign
Office of Great Britain, note of the USSR Embassy in London to the
Foreign Office of Great Britain:
On May 4 the USSR Embassy in London sent a note to the Foreign Offi2e
of Great Britain, the contents of which were as follows:
The USSR Embassy in Great Britain conveys its respects to the
Foreign Office of Great Britain, and has the honor to notify it of
the following:
During the stay in Portsmouth of a squadron of Soviet warships on Apr.
at 0730 hours, sailors of the Soviet ships discovered a diver
swimming between the sides of the Soviet destroyers. The diver, wearing
a black, light-weight diving suit with flippers on his feet,
remained on the surface for a minute or two, and then dived again bear
the side of the destroyer Smotryashchy.
The officer commanding the squadron of Soviet ships, Rear Admiral
Kotov, in a conversation with the Chief of Staff of Portsmouth
Naval Base, Rear Admiral Burnett, drew his attention to this case
of the appearance of a diver nearthe mooring of the Soviet ships
directly alongside the destroyers.
Rear Admiral Burnett catagorically denied the possibility of the appearance
of a diver alongside the Soviet ships, and stated that during that
time no diving work whatsoever was being carried out in the harbor.
Actually, as is evident from reports published in the British press
on Apr. 30 of this year, the fact that secret diving experiments
were carried out by the naval command in the area of the mooring
of the Soviet ships in Portsmouth is confirmed. Moreover, the execur,ion
of these experiments resulted in the death of the British diver.
It is sufficient to recall that the DAILY SKETCH, in a note on the death
of the diver Crabb, reported as follows: "He dived the last time
in Stokes Bay, in the area of secret test trials not far from the
mooring of the Russian cruiser Ordzhonikidze."
Attaching great significance to such an unusual fact as the carrying
out of secret diving thls alongside Soviet warships visiting the
British naval base of Portsmouth, the Embassy would be grateful
to the Foreign Office of Great Britain for clarification of this
question.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000009070003-5'
-BB 13- &
-BB 14-
British Note
USSR INIERNATIONAL-AFFAIRS
May 14, 1956
Note of the Foreign Office of Great Britain to the USSR Embassy
in London: On Play 9 the USSR Etbassy in London received the roll
note from the Foreign Office of Great Britain:
-
The Foreign Office of Great Britain conveys its respects to the Embassy
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and has the honor to
give the following answer to the Embassy's note dated May 4:
As has already been publicly stated, Lieutenant Commander(Kapitan Tr*tyevo
Bangs) Crabb was carrying out diving tests, and is supposed that he
perished during these tests. The diver detected from the Soviet warahips,
and, as stated in the Soviet note, swimming between the Soviet
destroyers, was, in all probability, (Po vsei vidimosti) Lieutenant Commander
Crabb.
His presence near the destroyers was without any permission whatsoever,
and Her Majesty's Government expresses regret over this incident. -
Kotov Interview in PRAVDA
Moscow,\TASS, in English Morse to North America, May 13,1956, 0200 OMT--E
(Text) ?
Moscow--PRAVDA publishes an interview with Rear Adtharal V.F. Kotov con-
cerning the incident with the British diver Crabb, which reads:
It has been learned*om the exchange of notearbetween the Embassy of
the USSR in London and the British Foreign &floe, published yesterday,
that Commander Crabby tile British diver, otgrried out secret diving
tests on ATT. 19, in the'area of the anchorage of the Soviet warships
which had come to the United Kingdom ?yrs friendship visit. The
British press bluntly points Out that Crabb perished while carrying
out an underwater espionage oPeratiod. against the Russian cruiser
during the stay of the Soviet shiptS'in Portsmouth.
In this connection a PRAVDA correspondent rang up Rear Admiral V.F.
Kotov, the commander of the Soviet naval?squadron that had visited
the United Kingdom in April; and asked hith to describe thisincident.
Rear Admiral V.F. Kotov communicated the following:
At 0730 GMT on Apr. 19 three sailors of the destr yer Sovershenny, which
was anchored next to the cruiser Ordzhonikidze in rtsmouth Harbor,
spotted on the surface of the water between the Soviet destroyers a
diver clad in a blapk, light diving suit. On his headlke wore
a mask with a quadrangular cut for the eyes. On his feet -were rubber_
flippers.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
-LONDON (ENGLAND) SUV1QAY EMESS MAY 4 ispe
Approvea t-or Ketease 2003/02/27 : C A-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
tory of the great Frogman Muddle grol
ow comes a sur rise turn from 3r mks
Sunday Express Political Correspondent
1 TH fantastic Frogman Mystery look its strangest turn of
all yesterday. The Russians came to Sir Anthony Eden's
rescue in his acutely difficult position. They attacked Mr.
iGaitskell for trying to make capital out ,of the mission of
Lionel Crabb -near the Russian ships on their visit to
,
Portsmouth.
The Socialists were poised for their all-out attack on the ,Govern-
- 'molt tomorrow: They thought they had the Premier on a spot,
_iiarticularly after the disclosure that the Cabinet had sent an apology
:.to Russia, and kept the fact secret for several days.
. , ,
into. this sit uatio n stepped Marshal
Bulganin and Mr. Krushehev through the
Russian Government newspaper lzvestia.
Said this Kremlin mouthpiece :--- .
"The leader of the Labour. Party, Gaitskell, pro-
poses to make a sharp criticism of the Government in
Abe name of his party. The Labour leaders wish. to
'make use of this incident to distract the attention of
the public from their own actions during the stay of
- Mr, Bulganin and Mr. Krushchev?actiona_ which were
.not well-wishing towards the Soviet'Union."
quarters.f.
. True, Izvestia condemns the action of " those
British circles mixed up in the' Crabb .. . ?...,..._
' affair as incompatible with international ,': ?
? law and. hospii0fialtg f:rni#
11140$01676R000900070003-5
Appro egkEgweisgs SE' 1
,k..,4,.
4,....... 4
Otie
- ' :And Pravda, the ? ' Russian Com-
munist Party newnoter, Jia4,J,kikt
bitter* article abeltIVPVW-1110111nW
which the Socialists quarrelled with B
and K. , It condemns Mr. Gaitskell and
, other. Socialist leaders as in "a position
'even worse than that of the Right-wing
of the Conservatives," 1
This , article is doubly significant
because it is signed by "Observer," a
signature which often covers authorship
t.0f the highest level.
REPLY from Mr. Gaitskell last
night: " The Soviet Communist Party is
evidently, continuing its violent campaign Against the
:British Labour Party. The Communists are furious
that we attempted to raise the question of Social
',. Democrats imprisoned in Communist- controlled
:'. countries.
t' " How little they understand us ! We have no,
'regrets, and make no apologies. We are satisfied that ,
public opinion is overwhelmingly behind us.
"As for the ' frogman ' affair, it would be the duty
of any Opposition in Britain to probe such an extra-
ordinary story of muddle and incompetence of a
GQvernment department."
1 ARTHUR 'BRITTENDEN adds some
more pages to the Frogman Dossier
Did the Russians KNOW
Crabb was coming?
[RELIEF is growing that when Lionel Crabb went
?4-1' into the , waters of Portsmouth harbour, Russian
frogmen were waiting for him.
Seven months ago Crabb accomplished a similar
? mission under the Russian cruiser Sverdlov in Ports-
mouth harbour. He talked about it to other frogmen.
And they, regarding that mission as a never-to-be-.
repeated triumph, talked too?to a wider circle.
-Did Russian agents hear about the Sverdlov affair?
,If so they would beyond doubt warn the Russian Navy
to protect the B and K ship., And it is pretty certain
, that one of the first people to know that Crabb had
, dived?and failed?was Mr. Krushchev. He probably
, knew before Sir Anthony Eden.
se 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
A hidden meaning?
While our Secret Service men were still trying'
to. ke'ep the incident hushed up, Mr. Krushchev in a
Birmingham speech on April 23 declared: "We don't
ask you to sell us guns or warships. As A matter of
fact, the armament on a modern warship is not so very'I
much up to date. 1
"If you want one or two (Mr. Krushchev laughed),
we could sell you some of our cruisers because they very
soon get out of date today. What we did yesterday is
out of date today. That is obvious to everyone."
Only now does the possibility of hidden meaning in
those remarks become clear. Is it not likely -that
Krushchev was throwing out veiled hints that he knew
all about the:Commander Crabb Incident?
? One riddle solved Where
he got his gear.
NE of the great anxieties at the tV:miralty (except
,? among the few in the know) was that Crabb
would be found wearing ofdelally-issbed get. That,
at once, would have implicated the Setrvice as- a whole.
But I can reveal that Crabb did NOT use ,toirindralty
kit. He bought his frogman's suit, fltppers, and mask
? from a private firm at Surbiton, Surrey, when f e went
on the Sverdlov mission. He paild bet*een [20 t nd ?30
for the gear.
? When Crabb set off to Portsmouth with t---cd gear
:nearly four weeks ago to inspect the ,13 and K thip he
" had still pot completed paying for it, ?ife was ni inning
to settle the bill out of the 60 guineas he v,-:< .)treeed
?
? for his latek, job by it a Secret
Service bosgis. rail"IIIAT,
MONEY IRAS sTILII, NOT
BEEN PAID OUT.
Crabb's stficitors 1-07e asked
the AdmiraT.y abOW. 1:,, They
are still w lug for '..trii money; .
to be handee over.
The tarrlifvss ourr pa:plant of
Crabb's Jed prom vt,: Lnother
question tilliti,711, wh'el answered,
will reveal gribb's fru( ?utus :? f..
What i about Mi
, pension issue? '
'Ts Mrs. a.trice Crab, the
?-g- frogman' mother mid next-
Of-kin (Crab's itatr?u ge was
. isto.tvedE e get a pels:on? .Xf,
she does, it c an meat or ly one
that the G nal arnent
accepts respimisibility lot Crabb's
- veniure.
Dies thisi
factor no hehind
the Admiratity's refusal ' o say
that Crabb p dead?
Tivo weeks have ea;soli sinct
?they state he ruts:, - be
l
lin
`.!preaumed Pad:" t slAil no
. 'eertIficate 1 pr.tiritp;i,-In of
death has bfon isstiel.
_ I understard that, i ' `his oer-
? tifleale is nissued . .t i.hi next
feW days, ?mazider Gmbh's
solcitors ar to reakt, /140TOU3
reOresentati _.t. :
epe an unroalrial SerVIde.
Rio, 7 is kiVed In action, a.
pension for the 7 eczt of-kirt
depends on iieed. Mrs. Orabb
ntakes no ha .tishlo el li n But
.if Crabb was on ?facial t-,iervice
, employment.1 at le a. i I the
Admiralty iutf,t inqwre whether
, she. requires :ielo.
. That ingunw?or the tack of,
, it?will showi lust how " )nielal '
Crahh'si
ra.slon was.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
16 May 1956
Approved For Release 2003103( ;r9WR: DP801301676R000900070003-5
Approved For Rele
POLITICAL NOTES
VOTING IN DEBATE
ON CDR. CRABB
; MR. MORRISON AND MR?
SHINWELL ABSTAIN
? FROM OUR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
Two Opposition ex-Ministers who did
not vote with their colleagues against
the Government, in the 'division at the
? end of Monday night's Commons debate
on the Commander Crabb affair were
Mr. Herbert Morrison, ?the former
deputy leader of the party, and Mr.
Shinwell. Both had taken part in the
division two hours earlier at the end of
the Cyprus debate and had registered
their votes against the Government.
Mr. 'Clement Davies, leader of the,
Liberal Party, voted against the Govern-
ment in the Cyprus division and for the
Government in the division that followed.
the Prime Minister's refusal to say more
about the circumstances of 'the presumed,
death of Commander Crabb.
THE THEATRE TAX
Sir Thomas O'Brien presided at the all-
Party meeting t before the
Budget to hear the thfife industry's plea
for the abolition itertainments duty on
the living theatr This plea has received
a great deal of incyt among bank .bench".
M.P.s and there was ppqintment when
the Chancellor was in ile to make in his
Budget any concessi of the kind that had
" been hoped for.
The new use is supported by Mr.
Grimond, th Chief Whip, and 7;
Mr. Robens, t mem er "f i'071r
Big 1301 WILI be stopped early in Juiy so:,
that the clock an rs can be
overhauled.- #1"-EfFiC faces ill also be
reglazectand the work will about three '-
months. This was anno cd by the Par- -
liamentary Secretary ? the Ministry of :
Works, in a writ!' reply yesterday to a
question by Mr. ohn Eden in the House 11
of Commons.
Repair of war o e clock tower
began a year ago, and the s c scaffolding
will be used for the work n Big Ben. The
makers of the clock, essrs. Dent, will
overhaul the clock echanism Viithout
charge under their aintenance contract.
The bell hamme will be removed
for renovation and re ir and the hands:
will he taken off. en all . four faces:
have been reglazed, te Ministry will con-,
?tinue experiments wjlh the lighting of the'
clock, including tjials with fluorescent
tubes.
While Big Bcif is being overhauled, the
'POW V4iftra09?CP11876R000900070003-5-
BY-ELECTION WRIT
The Government Chid Whin yesterday
10 May 19%
Approved For Release 2003/02% clek.gDP801301676R000900070003-5
1.11..!12,J
NO AUTHORITY FOR DIVE BY
COMMANDER CRABB
SIR A. EDEN'S REPLY: FULL ACCOUNT
"NOT IN PUBLIC INTEREST"
A fruitless Opposition attempt was
made yesterday to get the Speaker's per-
mission to move the adjournment of the
House, after the Prime Minister had
steadily refused to enlarge on his short
statement about the death of Com-
mander Lionel Crabb, the frogman who
was reported missing after a dive in
_Stokes Bay, near Portsmouth Harbour,
on April 19.
Although Labour members received
with sounds of shocked surprise Sir
Anthony Eden's decision, in the public
interest, not to disclose the circum-
stances in which Commander Crabb was
presumed to have met his death, the
House heard in almost complete silence
the news that what had been done was
without the authority or knowledge of
Ministers and that appropriate dis-
ciplinary, steps were being taken.
- The Prime Minister's firm refusal to be
drawn by taunts of evasion and the like
was warmly applauded from the benches
behind him, but the Opposition showed
themselves increasingly restive at his resist-
ance to their pressure for more
info-el-nation.
"COMPLETE EVASION"
The subject arose on Mr. J. Dugdale's
question asking for the evidence on which
the Admiralty officially presumed the death
of ?Commander Crabb; what were the
circumstances of his disappearance; and
whether efforts were still being made to
' locate the body.
S10?e, '_" 0.01_
cg j' ution cries
a
az-1114 a
aidS401).
.f.1111.FilaY
nava
reason, Sir Anthony Eden said: "What
I said was that disciplinary steps arc being
taken."
Mr. Shinwell asked if action was to be
taken against some individual or individuals
who gave instructions to Commander
Crabb; and if it was because they defied
authority, or because they acted without
consulting Ministers. The Prime Minister
repeated: " I have nothing to add to my
answer."
Mr. Dugdale sought leave to move the
adjournment of the House, in view of the
Government's failure to give a satisfactory
explanation of the events connected with
the disappearance of Commander Crabb.
The Speaker, giving his ruling, said:
"This application is governed by authority.
When a Minister refuses to answer a
question on the grounds of public interest
it has been ruled in the past?and I adhere
to it?that that is a matter which cannot
be raised, and therefore I must decline 1
the application."
SHADOW CABINET'S
DISCUSSION
FURTHER QUESTIONS BY
LABOUR M.P.
FROM OUR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
The Prime Minister had full support
from Government back benchers for his
firm refusal to say anything in reply to
questions yesterday about the circum-
fito-ught that statement would mererv `*
stances of the disappearance of Com-
4
mander Crabb, but Opposition memberx
0,1Q.141111ABFA?achiIta?...the_mystery and: Tensiry-
res,lmeaspocitla t
qine/5_, Iscrucitcd-tiltthe_- -Nir. rriffit . Jul= Dslygdale's question. to ?,11,L-h
It Ls necessarit tri tne special mister replied. had eccn
--addressal to Mr. George Ward'. PJrha-
-sin-emery and Financial Secretivy to the
tAtIntiralty;attio is the senior represcri-Itive
of that department in the Commons. I he
Prime Minister decided yesterday that it
would be better for him to reply to the
question himself. Earlier in the day he
had as his guest at luncheon at 10, Downing
Street, Lord Mountbatten, First Sea Lord
and Chief of Naval Staff.
or t e now o er Majesty's
-Ministers. Appropriate disciplinary steps
are being taken.?
' Mr. Dugdale said this was one of the
most extraordinary statements ever made by
a Prime Minister. It was a complete evasion
of ministerial responsibility. Mr. Dugdale
then put these questions :?
Why was Commander Crabb diving in
the close vicinity of the Soviet cruiser here
on a friendly visit? Under whose authority
was a police officer sent to the hotel at
which Commander Crabb was staying with
ettnthdr ffl? tsli'hiS di@ 100/0 of Big
register showing their" names to be torn
out? What was the name of the other
man ? Why did the police officer threaten
the hotel proprietor with the Official Secrets
Act?
The Prime Minister replied: "I thought
It right to make the statement which I have
made, and I have nothing to add to it."
(Ministerial cheers.)
MR. GAITSKELL'S PLEA
Mr. Gaitskell, Leader of the Oppo-
sition, said: "The Prime Minister will be
aware that a great deal of information has
already been published in the Press. Does
he not think on reflection, in view of the
amount of speculation which undoubtedly
will continue in the absence of any informa-
tion from the Government, that it really
would be wiser and in the general interest.
if a fuller explanation were given ? "
_(Opposition cheers.)
Sir Anthony Eden replied that he had
given the fullest consideration to this
t matter. " I can assure Mr. Gaitskell," he
went on, "that there are certain issues
t which are the responsibility of the Prime
k Minister himself, and having given all
. reflection to all the information at our dis-
posal I thought it my duty to giye the
sanswer I have, and I am afraid I must
tell the House that I cannot vary from the
answer."
Describing this answer as "totally unsatis?
Lfactory to the Opposition," Mr. Gaitskell
1 asked :. " Is the Prime Minister aware that
-while We would all wish to protect public
security, suspleion must inevitably arise
s that his refusal to make a statement is not
iso much in the interests of public security
as to hide a very grave blunder which has
loccurred ? "
"ONLY DECISION"
The Prime Minister rejoined that the
;House and the country "must draw their
conclusions from what I have said
(Opposition cries of " It will "), and also
from what I declined to say.
" Mr. Gaitskell," he went on, "will
lunderstand I have weighed up these eon-
Isiderations and they have weighed heavily
in my answer. With his experience, he knows
;there are some of these decisions 'only a
1Prime Minister can take, and I am con-
vinced after the most careful reflection the
'decision was the right and only one."
Mr. Gaitskell then asked: "Are we to
;take it, in the absence of any further state-
ment from the Prime Minister, and in the
ilight of what he has just said about the
;public drawing their own conclusions; that
Un fact officers or an officer of her Majesty's
tforces was engaged tmon the business of
espionage during the Russian visit? "
Sir Anthony Eden.?Mr. Gaitskell is per-
fectly entitled to put any wording he likes
on what I said. My words stand as they
? are without any glosS anyone can put on
them.
Replying to Mr. Shinwell, who asked
tagainst whom the Prime Minister was
.itakin g disciplinary action, f and for what
VIEWS ON DISCIPLINE
There was much curiosity among M.P.s
of all parties about the "appropriate dis-
ciplinary steps" to be taken in connexion
with the incident. Sonic members thought
Mitt 4Iti@a Ilse Pi'1rn MlnlMr hod Apei4d4
that it would not be in the public interest
to disclose the circumstances in which t
Commander Crabb is presumed to have
met his death it would have been better
for him to have left the matter there, with- ;
out adding the reference to disciplinary
measures.
Conservative members and Ministers
alike were surprised at the vehemence with
which the Leader of the Opposition joined
in the questioning of the Prime Minister
and at his reference to the possibility of j
"espionage during the Russian visit." The I
Opposition were intensely dissatisfied with
the Prime Minister's reply and their view is
that the incident reveals a disturbing degree 1
of incompetence and muddle on the part of
whatever authorities were concerned. The I
matter was discussed last night at a meeting t
of the Opposition Shadow Cabinet and the I
feeling there appears to have been that the t
incident must be probed further.
It is thought that the Opposition will 1
seek to raise the incident in a Commons
debate at the earliest opportunity next week.
Monday will probably be a Supply day in
the House -when the Opposition choose':
their own subjects of debate?and this j'
would enable them to interrogate the
Government further on the mystery of
Commander Crabb. The Opposition alsol
wish to debate the situation in Cyprus. in
the light of the confirmation by the -
Governor of the two death sentences, ant('
both these subjects may be dealt with on;
Monday.
Mr. Arthur Lewis, Labour member for.;
West Ham, North, has also tabled a ques-;
tion for next Wednesday. /4e will ask the.:
Parliamentary and Financial Secretary to
the Admiralty what position Commanderl
Crabb held in his department; where the:
officer was stationed; and whether the;
Minister will make a statement on the;
circumstances in which Commander Crabb;
has been Posted as missing.
ADMIRALTY SILENCE
-t
It was impossible to discover last night,i
after the Prime Minister's statement.1
'whether the Admiralty adhered to the an-i
nouncement they made on. April '29, that:
Commander Crabb "did not return from a7
test dive which took place in connexion/
with trials of certain underwater apparatus,.
in Stokes Bay, in the Portsmouth area.i
about a week ago.".
Asked if this was still the position, the:
Chief of Naval Information, Captain A. W.
Clarke, said: "The Admiralty has no corn--
ment, no further information, and is not
prepared to answer any questions at all.' ,
Until last night Admiralty spokesmen re- -
peated the statement of April 29 in answer.
to all inquiries, adding that beyond it they..
had no comment.
A naval spokesman at Portsmouth said.1
on the question of disciplinary steps: " I.
have no knowledge of anything in this con-
nexion in the Portsmouth Command." Ai
similar statement was made at H.M,S.
Vernon, the Navy's underwater establishs
ment at Portsmouth,
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 CIA-RDP80.B01676R000900070003-5
LONDON (ENGLAND) SUNDAY TINES MAY 3 1956
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
?
GAITS Ed: NO,
' APOLOGIES
TO SbV1ET
--1-
MR. GAITSKELL said yester-
day that the Labour Party
.made no apologies for raising
the question of the freedom of
political prisoners during the
visit to Britain of Marshall
Bulganin and Mr. Khcushchev.,
He was commenting on "a, report
in the Russian newspaper Izvestia,'?
regarding the missing British frog-
man, Commander Crabb. lzvestia
stated:
"The Labour leaders wish to
make use of this incident to distract;
the attention qf the public from
their own actions during the stay in
London of Marshal Bulganin ?.and
Mr. Khrushchev, actions which, ss is
Well known, were not well-wishing
ttowards the Soviet Union.
The Labour leaders were taking
into account the fact that "the '
Crabb affair" had aroused great -
alarm and concern, the paper added,
The British ? people understood how
Incompatible were such actions with '
" the norms of international law and
with I ie elementary rules of
hospitality."
Soviet Camimign
Mr. Gaitskell said: "The Com-
munists are furious that we dared
to raise the question of Social Demo-
crats imprisoned in Communist-
controlled countries, ,
"They now try to make out that
?
we are sorry we did so and want to
obscure this Matter by having a
debate on the frogman episode. How
little they understand us. We have
no regrets and make no apologies
for bringing up the question of the
freedom of political prisoners which,,
to us. is a matter of principle.
"We are satisfied that public
opinion is overwhelmingly behind us
I on, this. Our only regret is the
uncompromisingly hostile reply we
received from Mr. Khrushchev.
"As for the frogman affair, it
would be the duty of any opposition
In Britain to probe such an extra-
ordinary story of muddle and incbmi
petence of a Government Depart-
ment. It is no doubt difficult for the
Communiststo understand this.
since they do not allow. opposition'
,of any kind in the' countries which
,they, control."
'SACK :MINISTERS'
Mr. Shinwell, Labour M.P. for
Easington, said at Houghton-le-
Spring, Co. Durham, yesterday.
"The first thing to do over the
Crabb affair is to make big
changes at the Admiralty or in
the department responsible.
Frankly, I don't believe the na-
tion wollld suffer if the whole
of the Service Ministers, with
the exception of Sir Walter
Monckton, Defence Minister, were
sacked."
Governments had been spying on
each other for many years, although
it was doubtful whether it,was
worth the cost. "But when pri-
vate individuals take a hand, even
when they are inspired by some of
the clever people in the Admiralty,
it is time they were harshly dealt
with."
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
LONDON (ENGLAND) SUNDAY TIMES
MAY t 3 1958
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
AT WESTMINSTER --
- Diving fn Muddied
Waters
By A STUDENT OF POLITICS
'SIR ANTHONY EDEN and his
L) Government , have struck
, an uncomfortable patch, more
' frustrating and irritating than
dangerous, first through the
affair of Commander Crabb, the
missing frogman, and then
I through the revolt of a group
I of Conservative M.P.s against
an important Government .Bill.
There is nothing peculiarly
iealamitOus in these troubles, yet
their timing is doubly Unfortunate
for the Prime Minister personally,
Just when he was very much on
the crest, with hi S prestige and
authority restored and his leader-
ship reasserted by his suceessful ?
handling of the Bulganin and 1
Khrushchev visit.
)
. Some political 'sludge, but little
else, will result from the two hours :
.to be spent in the Commons to-
morrow night dredging in the ,
'muddied waters of Portsmouth 1
Harbour; but the sharp reactions
from Moscow Will . have come as
balm to the Labour leaders' dinner-
party wounds, ,
* * *
VITERYBODY loves a mystery.
?14 especially in that borderland
between politics and the intelligence
services So the debate may be
judged not only good politics, but
intriguing to public curiosity as we'll
,There is, however, much more to the ,
present Parliamentary affair than
? the mere fascination ? of probing
' closely guarded secrets. Deeper i
motives are at play. _
,
It may be doingMr. Galtskell and
.his Front Bench an injustice to.
."?suggest that the case of Commander
Crabb has been seized upon as a
.welcome diversion from that bitter "
dinner-party squabble, but, if sus-
picious minds think along these
. lines, the sequence of events must
be held responsible.
That, and the contrast between I.
the impetuous haste to demand a
? debate on the secret? details of the
? events at Portsmouth, and the
laboured attempts to avoid a debate
on the major international issues of
the Russian leaders' talks in
Downing Street.
Mr. Alfred Robens was at pains to
. discover any excuse for not request-
ing an immediate debate on the 13.
and K. visit. "Do I gather that the
Prime Minister felt it would not be
. quite proper to have a debate on the
'', White Paper? Would the Prime
.Minister feel it difficult or embarrass-
ing to have ? a debate on such a
nater?"
! Sir Anthony mayacegidiali well
I wonder BA the se ivit
i now prevailing, r era
I' no matter how " embarrassing" or
" not quite proper' it may be to the
national interest, the Crabb affair
.,.-",..i iln rlt.11st I Pti_
VACING the grilling in the Corn-
-1: mons, Sir Anthony revealed a
new restraint, and calm of per-
sonality. Not so very long ago ne
would have bridled angrily and re-
vealed his irritation with cutting,
explosive, even short-tempered re-
plies. Angry he undoubtedly was: he
reddened fiercely with indignation
at Mr. Gaitskell's attack; but he kept
a firm check on himself throughout.
. . _ _ .
In all this the attitude of Mr. Her-
bert Morrison has given cause for-
comment. As Minister for Horne
Security during the war, and with
subsequent experience as Foreign
Secretary, he has the greatest know-
ledge on the Opposition side of how
the intelligence and security serviceS
operate. During the exchanges.
he stood aside in studied detach-
ment, and is miderstood to have
since urged moderation on his party.
Not that Mr. Morrison has in any
way ? sought to question his leader's
policy; but his close friends, who are
known to be responsive to his views,
say privately and significantly that,
to rush in with the challenge of a
vote of no confidence M the present
state of knowledge would be ill-
advised.
Some Labour M.P.Is are refletting
sombrely Whether Earl Attlee Would
have shown such impetuosity. -
elease 2003/02/27: CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
LONDON (ENGtharieclyffk?o?ft28?e 2003,8A/2l1:flttIRP80B01676R000900070003-5
ecret Service
e
three
By CHAPMAN PINCHER
THE case of frogman Lionel
Crabb is to be thrashed out
at a . special session of the
Combined Intelligence Corn-
mittee Britain's highest
security authority ? it was
revealed last night.
In this secret conclave of the
chiefs of M.I.5, the Secret Service
and Forces' Intelligence , depart-
ments the facts of how Crabb died,
under the Russian warships in
Portsmouth harbour will be
disclosed in full?probably for the
first time.
Purpose of the session is to
meet three demands from Sir
Anthony Eden which -are an
iential Part of the "disciplinary
? 'on" he has taken to prevent
repetition of such an embar-
rassing situation.
: The experts
must find some way of allowing
closer political control by Ministers
over Intelligence work without
stifling the initiative of agents or
spreadinc.- secret information too
widely.
Defence Minister Sir Walter
Monckton, who is responsible for
advising the Cabinet on Intelli-
gence matters, knew nothing about
the frogman project.
Neither did his special adviser
on scientific intelligence, Mr Eric
Williams.
A SUPREME BOSS?
DEMAND No. 2: There must be
much closer control by Intelligence
chiefs over what is happening in
their departments.
It seems certain that though
Naval Intelligence men were
involved in the Crabb venture, the
Director of Naval Intelligence was
not told about it.
DEMAND No. 3: The system
whereby "freelance" agents like
Commander Crabb are employed by
I
r e
Intelligence dep irtmen ,s ?must be
reviewed and tia Menet'
The eommittt e may dr.i ide that
the only solutidir wib le to follow
the United Statr, lead Lnd appoint
' a highly influential nan t. overall
' chief of the In telligeuei depart-
ments.
The -United Slates has a Central
Intelligence. Agoney, itaded by
Allen Dulles, bi other in Foreign
Secretary John Vaster Di l'es.
Britain's .11( :n t I ntrIligenee
? Bureau, headed by Si.* Kenneth
Strong, functions as a central
clearing house for lunUigence
information, bit exert r-,es no '
control over poll( y.
;
An alternativv anti le, s drastic '
move would 10e. to iolnt a
permanent full-.time e.,7iier for the
Combined Inteli 4encot ,iriamittee, 1
with powers to -range through the.3
4vhole c netwuk.
At present tL. chairtn IA of the
committee is a kkgh-lintl adminis-
trative civil servc nt who iias other
jobs to do. He ;s appo nted for a
two-year term.
_
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
MEMORANDUM FOR: mr. Dulles
Last night you were reviewing the
parliamentary- debates of May 14 on the Crabb
ease. Walter Pforiheimer has sent me an earlier
exchange between the Prime Minister and Mr.
Gaitskell which took place on May 9th. This is
attached along with the texts of the Soviet note
of May 4th and the British reply thereto of May
9th. In addition, Walter forwarded a few copies o
selected news items which he thought might be
of interest to you and which I have also attached.
Attachments
FMC
7 June 1960
(DATE)
FORM NO. 101 REPLACES FORM 10.101
1 AUG 54 WHICH MAY BE USED.
(47)
Approved For Release 2003/02/27: CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
7yvrus 1756
It. Hon. D.
Lt.-Col. W.
er, Cmdr. Ft.
R. C.
William
E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)
Peter (W inchesterj
rig. Sir John (Norwood)
;apt. C.
, A. C. M.
M.
I. R. tnneineelt, nr.t
. Hn. Sir"). (Kens'gt'n, 8.)
;apt. Hon. Richard
acettrey
Harold (Stockport, S.)
Sir William (Woolwich, W.)
Henderson (Fife, E.)
Scott, Col. M.
t. Hon. darnels (Moray)
e, H. G.
C. S. (Aylesbury)
W. D. M. (Orpington)
Ir Charles (Eastbourne)
(nem (Bradford, N.)
1.
Leslie (Canterbury)
1, Kenneth (Walton)
1, Lt.-Cdr.R.(Croydon, 8.)
E.
?Kemsley, C. N.
(Bradford, W.)
ehn (Wasertree)
I. F. L.
It. Hon. It. H.
nm, Lady
Morgan, J. K.
Miss J. H.
s. F.
I, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
mith, D. C.
ijor Patrick
on. George (Worcester)
sme Irene (Tynemouth)
ice, Capt. Rt. Hon. 0.
n, Rt. Hon. Harold'
Ir H.
, W.S.I.(Penrith &Ill'order)
Paul (Sunderland, 8.)
R. Dudley (Exeter)
(Bridgwater)
leoffrey (Truro) ? '
Dn. R.
John victor
Idarn (The WNW)
FOR THE NOES:
HI and Mr. Galbraith.
: I beg to ask
pproved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
1757 The Case of 14 MAY 1956 Commander Crabb
Motion made. and Question proposed.
That a further sum, not exceeding ?20, be
granted to fler Majesty, towards defraying the
charges for the year ending on 31st March,
1957, for the following Votes in connection
with the case of Commander Crabb, namely:?
CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1956-57 AND NAVY
Es umATFA, 11-57
Class I, Vote 4, Treasury and Subordinate
Departments
Navy Estimates, Vote 12,
Office
Admiralty
... 10
10
?20
THE CASE OF COMMANDER
CHARD
8.18 p.m.
Mr. Hugh Gaitskell (Leeds, South):
On 29th April, the Admiralty announced
that Commander Lionel Crabb,R.N.V.R.,
was presumed dead after failing to return
from an underwater trial. The statement
went on to say that he did not return
from a test dive which took place in con-
nection with the trials of certain under-
water apparatus in Stokes Bay, in the
Portsmouth area, about a week before.
Commander Crabb is the central figure in
this strange episode which we are dis-
cussing in this very short debate this
evening.
Therefore,. I think it will be appro-
priate, since I suppose we must accept
the conclusion of the Admiralty, if, at
the start, on behalf of all of us, I were
to pay a tribute to a very gallant officer.
[HON. MEMBERS "Hear. hear."] He
was, of course, awarded the George
Medal in 1944 for gallantry and un-
daunted devotion to duty. Whatever may
be the circumstances in which he met his
death, all of us will agree that this country
would be the poorer if it were not for
men like Commander Crabb.
In opening this debate, there are certain
things I want to make clear about the
attitude of the Opposition. First, we
recognise the unfortunate necessity, in
present conditions, for secret services.
Every great Power has such services and,
obviously, as with other defences, we
cannot do without these. Also, we fully
appreciate that details of the activities of
these services cannot be disclosed as are
the activities of other Government
Departments, because to do so would
make nonsense of their work. However,
I must add this: Parliament accepts that
33 D 21
1753
situation, and refrains from pressing these
matters, and, of course, Ministers, xer-
cising their undoubted rights, refuse to
give information on what 1 think nay
be regarded as certain generally accented
assumptions.
These assumptions are: first. that the
operations of these services are ultimately
and effectively controlled by Minister, or
by a Minister ; secondly, that their opt-ra-
tions are secret; thirdly, that what Ihey
do does not embarrass us in our in ar-
national relations. And perhaps one
might add, fourthly, that what they do
appears, as far as we can make out, to
be reasonably successful- -[Latighterl- in
this sense, that if there were a widespr%. ad
feeling that the secret services ware
extremely incompetent and inept, then it
would be the duty of hon. Members to
raise the matter.
It is an unfortunate fact that, in the
episode Which we are discussing, none of
these four conditions appears to have
been fulfilled. The statement of the Prime
Minister makes it plain----at any rate, it
gives me the impression?that in this
instance Ministers were not ultimately
and effectively in control. Secondly, no-
body could say that the operations were
especially secret. Thirdly, it is a regrt -
table fact that there has been some etr -
barrasstnent to international relatioir,.
There may be some doubt about succev,.
but I will leave that on one side.
This is one reason why we on tbe
Opposition benches could not be content
with the statement made by the Prim:
Minister last week. Because, cryptic
though it was, it revealed through the
disclaimer of direct responsibility ant
through the reference to disciplinary steps.
that some wrong action had been taken
by a Government servant without the
authority and, indeed, apparently con-
trary to the desires of Ministers_
Now may I say a word about Minis-
terial responsibility in this matter. It is
the custom for Ministers to cover up
any decision by a civil servant; that is
to say, normally the Minister not merely
takes responsibility but appears to have
taken that decision himself, whether, in
fact, he did so or not. Even when this
is not done and, of course, there are
quite a number of occasions when it
would be pedantic to insist that it should
be done; when, in fact, a Minister comes
to the House. and says, "One of my
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP801301676R000900070003-5
1759 The Case
[MR. GAITSKELLJ
officials made a mistake," thereby imply-
ing that he, the Minister, was not directly
responsible for? that mistake, nevertheless
it is a sound and vital constitutional prin-
ciple that the Minister takes responsibility
for what has happened.
That is a principle which I venture to
say is fundamental to our democracy,
because if we were to depart from it, it
would imply that the Civil Service in
some way or other was independent and
not answerable to this House. Of course,
the extent to which we condemn a
Minister for an act of one of his officers,
or a failure by one of his officers,
obviously depends on the circumstances.
There are minor occasions when a
Minister admits that something has gone
wrong and the House accepts it and the
matter is left.
Another reason why we felt that we
had to discuss this matter further was
that other Departments apart from the
Secret Service are apparently involved.
There is no doubt that the Admiralty was
heavily involved. Indeed, one newspaper
goes so far as to say today that the
Naval Intelligence Department was prob-
ably at the centre of the whole thing, and
it may be that the Home Office also was
involved ?
The Secretary of State for the Home
Department and Minister for Welsh
Affairs (Major Gwylim Lloyd-George)
indicated dissent.
Mr. Gaitskell : I see the Home Secre-
tary shaking his head, but I would draw
his attention to one incident where police
officers were involved.
Finally, may I explain that we are
discussing this matter on this Motion with
particular reference to the salary of the
Prime Minister because, first, the right
hon. Gentleman himself decided, in
answering the Question last Wednesday,
to take responsibility for this matter and.
therefore, if we wanted to discuss it, that
was the correct thing to do; and,
secondly, if we had discussed it on the
Admiralty Vote alone that would have
narrowed the scope of the debate unduly.
Whatever we may feel about this inci-
dent, or series of incidents, none of us
would aqk that the Prime Ministet bIttauld
disclose what ought not to be disclosed,
either because it might endanger our
agents?one may as well use the word
33 D 22
14 MAY 1956 Commander f`rabb 1 760
for the people in our Sectet Seri :e- or
because it would involve giving info ?ria-
don away to a foreign Power, infoeintann
which, in the opinion of the Gove-timent,
should be kept from a foreign Po c.
.
Subject to this, I venture to s.ti that
it is the duty of any Opvsition in t tis
democracy of ours to probe any we.,kr ss
or what appear to be blunders 01 rts.
takes in Government adm nistrarcr I
feel confident that if hon. Menth 1, >a
the other side of the Comrnatee hat- iv at
in opposition, and a similar epise..t: h
occurred, they would, in pursuance ?)f
their duty, certainly hay: rais.. tie
matter in the House of Common.
Subject to the qualifica.ion, iriS
portant one, which I made shout
I very much hope that the Prime a a.
will tonight say all he possibly e?In -o
clear up the matter and allay the mewl-
ing anxieties. Whether or oot we
the Committee on this issue
frankly, entirely on what he can s iv to
us this evening.
I now turn to the case itself, 7,2
have very little time and I certaiali LI)
not propose to go through the facr3. er
the apparent facts, in gret3t detail. but
the following seems reasonably tem
On 18th April, Commander Crabb went
to Portsmouth and stayed at the Sal :)pal
Hotel with another gentlenun who r!ais-
tered in the name of Mr. Smith. 'M
next day both of them let the het:I
Mr. Smith returning later to pay th:. Eu
and collect the luggage. Front
onwards, Commander Crabb disar
Two days later, the Portsmouth 00ii::
appear at the hotel and tear out
pages of of the hotel registe-. whtch
course, included the names of ,..:)ri-
mander Crabb and his companion ltn
days later the Admiralty issued the ?,!it!-
ment part of which I read o the Om-
mittee at the beginning of my reareKi.
On 3rd May?four days afterwaTs-s--
the Soviet Government sent a Not: It
protest to the British Governmen-, .tni
in this they made it plain that a or
had been made' much ear:ier by 0:
commanding officer of the Soviet *
in conversation with the el ief of
of the Portsmouth naval base. at
occasion, according to the .`...oviet
tans Chief of gtitit, who Is
Burnett, categorically rejected
bility of the appearance of
alongside the Soviet ships ark. state.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1.1
17(
at
opc
of
bot
wa5
the
3Qt1
7
wh i
deli
the]
Mir
exp
wh i
Mir
to
the
whi
and
in I
abo
I di
as I
pro
tior
Cor
tl
if s
was
to
mai
nem
ceri
cen
'p
Mit
Prii
So',
epi
as
ter'
or
am
coy
by
fro
ser
ind
firs
ma
Sol
the
ilk+
agL
sto
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
bb 1760
Service?or
ing inform-
, information
Government.
;n Power.
to say that
;ition in this
my weakness
ders or mis-
tistration. I
Members on
_tee had been
episode had
pursuance of
- raised the
mmons.
:ion, an im-
bout security,
rime Minister
ssibly .can to
y the remain-
lot we divide
issue turns,
e can say to
itself. We
certainly do
the facts, or
at detail, but
Dnably 'clear.
r Crabb went
the Sallyport
nn who regis-
Smith. The
zft the hotel.
? pay the bill
From then
DI) disappears.
:mouth police
-tear out four
er, which of
Pes of Com-
ppanion. Ten
sued the state-
to the Corn-
my remarks.
i; afterwards?
nt a Note of
wernment, and
that a protest
arlier by the
^ Soviet ships
chief of staff
lase. On that
? Soviet Note,
Rear-Adnural
:ted the possi-
of a frogman
and stated that
1761 The Case of
14 MAY 1956
at the time indicated there were no
dpora dont in the port Involving the use
of frogmen. The comment that I feel
bound to make at this point is that this
was clearly completely contrary to what
the Admiralty itself was to say on
30th April.
The British Government in a Note
which, according to Moscow, was
delivered on 9th May, and presumably,
therefore, was sent before the Prime
Minister made his statement to us,
expressed regret for the incident, a matter
which, curiously enough, the Prime
Minister did not mention in his statement
to us the other day. Finally, we have
the Prime Minister's statement to us,
which is in the recollection of all of us
and to which, therefore, I need not refer
in detail. That is all I propose to say
about the story of these events.
I wish now to make a few comments.
I do not propose to go into great detail,
as the newspapers have done. I do not
propose to ask every conceivable ques-
tion, such as, for instance, "Where did
Commander Crabb get his diving gear?",
"Why was not a younger man sent down
if somebody had to go?", and, "What
was it that Commander Crabb was trying
to find out?" All these questions, and
many others, have been asked in the
newspapers. I repeat that I am not con-
cerned with anything more than the
central features of this business. Nor do
I propose to say much about the inter-
national aspect of the matter. As the
Prime Minister has made clear to the
Soviet Union, it is a very regrettable
episode, but for my part I fully accept,
as I am sure we all do, the Prime Minis-
ter's disclaimer of Ministerial knowledge
or approval. I should like to say that I
am sure that that should be accepted as
complete evidence of absolute good faith
by the Soviet Government as well.
Nor do I feel, though others may differ
from me on this, that this episode,
serious as it is in certain aspects, and,
indeed, deplorable as it was when one
first heard about it, is likely to do per-
manent damage to our relations with the
Soviet Government. We all know that
the Russians are realists in these matters.
There is not very much doubt that they,
like other Governments, have their
agents, and there have been various
stories in the newspapers of similar
33 D 23
Commander Crabb 1 762
occasions to which I will make no further
reference.
I am concerned more with what
appears to be the situation in the secret
service and the forces which work with
them because it seems to me that what
has been suggested, at any rate by the
Prime Minister's statement, and by what
we know, reveals a very grave lack of
control at home and, indeed, a most
unsatisfactory state of affairs within this
service.
It seems to me that a great deal turns
upon the question of the level at which
the decisions were taken. There was an
idea at one time when the great bout of
speculation was taking place in the Press
that possibly the whole thing had been a
private effort, that Commander Crabb,
financed by a mysterious private organisa-
tion, had gone on this investigation and,
indeed, that the Government had had
nothing to do with it whatever.
Unfortunately?I say, " unfortunately "
?the Prime Minister's statement shows. I
think, conclusively that that cannot have
been so. At least, if it were so, I can
only say that it is a great pity that the
Prime Minister did not make it clear
earlier. I think that we must conclude
from his statement?he will correct me if
I am wrong?that presumably the Secret
Service or a secret service and the
Admiralty must have been mixed up in
the plan from the.start. Again, I ask at
what sort of level was the decision taken,
if a decision were taken, to make this
kind of investigation. In particular, I
think that the Prime Minister might be
able to tell us how far this was a matter
in which the Admiralty took the initia-
tive.
Having said that, I would wish to pose.
if I may, a few central questions which.
I repeat, I hope that the Prime Minister
will be able to answer within the limits
that security permits. We all of us re-
call that when Mr. Bulganin and Mr.
Khrushchev were coming here, a very
great deal of attention was concentrated
upon the security precautions in connec-
tion with their visit and Questions were
asked in the House about the number of
guards they were to have, and so on.
One presumes that in taking these pre-
cautions, which we did not criticise and
which we accepted, it must have been,
must it not, the duty of the Admiralty
to guard the Soviet vessels?
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1763 The Case of 14' MAY 1956
[MR. GAITSKELL.]
That is one of the extraordinary
features of the whole business, because
if it were the Admiralty's responsibility
to guard these vessels, how was it that
Commander Crabb, if it was he, was able
to approach these vessels? One is bound
to ask the question: Was the security
guard very, very inadequate or was the
guard in the secret of Commander
Crabb's exploit?
Again, I come back to the question of
the level. It is very difficult to under-
stand how, that being the background,
this kind of exploit could have been per-
mitted unless it had been known to some
fairly high-ranking officers. I put that
as a supposition, and as the honest con-
clusion to which at the moment, I think,
we are drawn by the facts. The second
question I would like to ask is, first, what
steps were taken, if I may repeat it, to
guard these ships? The second ques-
tion is, who authorised the Admiralty
statement on 29th April, which is now
seen to have been at variance with the
statement of the Chief of Staff at Ports-
mouth to the Russian admiral, and
which, incidentally, was also very much
at odds with the Prime Minister's later
statement? The third question that I
want to put to the Prime Minister is
about the strange business of the Ports-
mouth police descending upon the
Sallyport Hotel and tearing out four
pages of the register.
Can the Prime Minister tell us under
what authority these officers acted? I
have made some inquiry into the legal
position, with the help of one or two of
my hon. Friends, and, as I understand,
this is the position. Under the Aliens
Order, it is an obligation on any hotel
keeper to keep a register of all persons
over 16 years old staying at the premises.
It is also an obligation on any person of
this kind to enter his name, nationality
and date of arrival, and the keeper of the
hotel has to require him to do so.
Furthermore, the keeper of the hotel has
to preserve the register for a year after
the last entry in it, and it is, of course,
open to inspection by any police officer
or person authorised by the Home
Secretary,
The Portsmouth police came in?in
fact, they (seized part of this register,
although, under the Aliens Order, it was
the property of the hotel keeper who is
under a statutory duty to preserve it. It
33 D 24
Commander Crabb
is indeed very hard, therefore. to see vd-t.L
right the police officers had to make th,
hotel keeper break the law in this way.
There is, of course, the additional piecc
of information?if it is correct- -that ti'
pollee officers warned the hotel keeNt
that if he resisted and refused to give ti
the register they would proceed agalni
him the Official Secrets Act. to exact;v
what way would the Official Serets
come into this? There is, of course, pro.
vision under the Official Secrets Actundcr
which it is an offence for a person to r.
tam n certain documents when the pericr
having such a document in his 'possessii-n
or control retains it
"when he has no right to retain it or wh:t
it is contrary to his duty to retain it or falls
to comply with any directions issued by"
lawful authority
"with regard to the return ot disps
thereof."
I think we ought to-take that as rele--
ring to Civil Service documents lino
documents of that kind. I am bound to
say that it is very difficult to see how a
hotel register can come within that ra--
ticular Section. I would ask, ;t. I ma-.
because this is an important print, wtti t
explanation the Prime Minister can gi?c
us. I repeat that we realise the need fur
a Secret Service. We realise that the
members of that Service have to go al)),
their work in queer ways, but it is a
matter of enormous importance that thci
should not be above the law. Wl!a:,
then, was the law under which they
operated?
The next point I wish to ask relat:s
to the Prime Minister's statemcnt abo,
disciplinary steps. Can the right hr,
Gentleman tell us against whon and
what manner those steps have bcr!
taken? Were any steps taken. for Ir.
stance, against Service personnel?
Finally, there is a question which
feel I must put out of regard for the re1;.'
tives of Commander Crabb. Can
Prime Minister Minister say whether the Joturn!d -
der?on the assumption, of course, tu-?
he was the person involved?belis.ved
the action which he took vts full
approved, or did he realise that was..
it were, purely a private enterpti,e
taking? Did he know dui( theta wou,
be this very serious consequence if, t
fact, it were discovered?
I will refer here against, if I ru tY, to la'
statement of the British Goveu!nent,
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1765
rather th
ment, to
seems to
fairness t
this is sc
up?that
without I
The I
Soviet No
ships swin
was to a
His preset
occurred
and Her
regret for
If that
had gor
genuine
with the
own initi
think, is :
ought to
of cours,
To dr.
are, whic
is impos
tion avai
I do no!
hope, fr
reassurin
from the
him that
lished in
and by N
with the
sion has
deplorab
control I
Secret S,
secondly
technical
created.
The hi
was bou
the whc
apparent
went to
deal of
the ques
mander
In some
say, givl
technical
Thirdly,
sion of t.
which is
I repe
level the
ticularly
if, in fat
3
? Crabb 1764
fore, to sec what
tad to make the
w in this way,
additional piece
:.orrect?that the
he hotel koeper
fused to give up
proceed against
Act. In exactly
icial Secrets Act
s, of course, pro-
iecrets Act under
r a person to re..
when the person
in his possession
retain it or when
o retain it or fails
ns issued by"
turn or disposal
ake that as refer-
documents and
I am bound tO
uIt to see how a
within that par-
r! ask, if I may,
rtant point, what
Ainister can give
alise the need for
realise that the
have to go about
ays, but it is a
ortance that they
the law. What,
'der which they
;11 to ask relates
statement about
I the right hon.
St whom and in
tops have been
is taken, for in-
personnel?
uestion which I
gard for the rela-
rabb. Can the
ler the comman-
, of course, that
:_-d?believed that
ik was fully
_se that it was, as
enterprise under-
that there would
nsequence if, in
4,4 I may, to the
Government, or
pprove or e ease
I,
1765 The Case 0,1 ? 14 MA
rather the letter of the British Govern-
ment, to the Russian Government which
seems to imply?as I say, I think out of
fairness to Commander Crabb's relatives
this is something that should be cleared
up?that he sworn to the RIVAIIM vsetit.la
without permission. The Note says:
"The frogman, who, as reported in the
Soviet Note, was discovered from the Soviet
ships swimming between the Soviet destroyers,
wits to all appearances Commander Crabb.
His presence in the vicinity of the destroyers
occurred without any permission ?whatever,
and Her Majesty's Government express their
regret for this incident."
If that were true and if, in fact, he
had gone to Portsmouth simply on
genuine trials not connected in any way
with the Soviet vessels and had, on his
own initiative, swum off to them, that, I
think, is something which the Government
ought to make plain. If it is not so, then,
of course, it is a different matter.
To draw the conclusions, such as they
arc, which one can from this business, it
is impossible for us on the hard informa-
tion available to pass any final judgment.
I do not seek to do so. I would still
hope, frankly, that a fuller and more
reassuring explanation were forthcoming
from the Prime Minister, but I must tell
him that 'so far, by what has been pub-
lished in the Press, by what he has said
and by what is in the exchange of Notes
with the Soviet Government, an impres-
sion has been created, first, of the most.
deplorable lack of co-ordination and
control between the Foreign Office, the
Secret Service and the Admiralty.; and,
secondly, that an impression of unusual
technical incompetence has also been
created.
The business of the hotel register, which
was bound to attract public attention to
the whole matter, the way in which,
apparently, before Commander Crabb
went to Portsmouth there was a great
deal of free talk by all sorts of people,
the questioning at a later stage of Corn-
niander Crabb's friends, which is reported
in some of the Press?none of this, I must
say, gives one much confidence in the
technical efficiency of the Service.
Thirdly, I think that it gives an impres-
sion of a degree of political unawareness
which is almost frightening.
I rene...a that a lot depends on at what
level these decisions were taken, but par-
ticularly in regard to the political aspects
if, in fact, the decisions were taken at a
33 D 25
Y 1956
:
00-70003-5,
Commander Crabb 1766
high level. Then it shows, as The Times
said in a very penetrating leader:
"irresponsibility just where irresponsibility
should not exist."
If, on the other hand, it was at a lower
level, it suggests that the people there,
the officers there, have got altogether out
of hand.
I must say this to the Prime Minister.
and I know he will accept it: it is his
burden and responsibility to look after
the Secret Service. These matters of
which I have spoken and the reflections
on the efficiency of Service co-ordination,
and so on, which I have mentioned are
essentially matters for the Prime Minister.
I would ask him, is he satisfied in the
light of what has happened with the
staffing of the security services? What
steps is he taking, or has he taken, to
prevent this sort of thing happening
again? Is he satisfied?I am sure he will
not take offence at this at all--that he,
the Prime Minister of the day, who has
these enormous responsibilities over the
whole field of government, is really in a
position to be the only Minister to keep
an adequate control on the Secret
Service? Can he, in fact, do this job as
it should be done directly himself?
Those are the questions we should like
the Prime Minister to answer bearing in
mind, I repeat, the security aspect, which
cannot be'overlooked. I have tried to put
our case and our anxieties on this in as
responsible a manner as I can. I realise
to the full the delicate nature of the sub-
ject we are discussing very briefly this
evening, but, while we must be careful
and while we must be cautious, demo-
cracy also must be made to work. We,
as the Parliament in a democracy, have
the right to have our fears allayed, our
anxieties extinguished ; or at any rate we
have the right to be satisfied that the
Government are taking steps to put
matters right.
8.49 p.m.
The Prime Minister (Sir Anthony
Eden): The right hon. Gentleman the
Member for Leeds, South (Mr. Gaitskell)
has reminded us?and rightly reminded
us, if I may say so?that it is a very
rare proceeding to refuse to disclose
public events or events which have
become talked about merely on the
ground that in the Government's judg-
ment it is not in the public interest to
do so.. -
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1767 The Case of
[THE PRIME MINISTER.]
Of course, we live, as we all know, in
an age of publicity, and in some quarters
it seems to be thought that there is
nothing which should be withheld from
public examination, discussion and
debate. That was not, I was glad to note,
the right hon. Gentleman's position
tonight. Nonetheless, Parliament has
preserved the long-established convention
that a responsible Minister may decline
to give information, if, in his judgment,
it is not in the public interest to do so.
We are dealing tonight, I must s.,
frankly to the House. with circumstances
in which no Government here or in any
other country, I believe, would say. more
than I am prepared to say to the House
tonight; nor is there anything contrary
to our practice, as the House knows, in
taking this action. It is often done in
defence. A classic example was the
atomic bomb, where the whole expendi-
ture--?100 million?was concealed in the
Estimates for a number of years.
Similarly in international affairs?let
me say this, because the right hon.
Gentleman asked a question?it is often
contrary to the public interest to disclose
the details of correspondence with a
foreign Government or to reveal the
course of negotiations with a foreign
Government leading up to treaties or
other agreements, and it is in any event
the immemorial custom not to publish
the receipt of a Note until the reply has
been returned and received by the Power
which sent the Note. I shall have some-
thing more to say about that in a
moment.
Again, to take our domestic affairs,
there are many things which my right hon.
and gallant Friend the Home Secretary,
for instance, is not obliged to state pub-
licity. He has not to disclose the grounds
on which he has decided to deport an
alien or those on which he grants or
refuses a certificate of naturalisation. I
say this to show that I agree with the
right hon. Gentleman; I think we are in
agreement that there can be no dispute
about the general principle that there are
tortalft thIno which it is ageing the
national interest to disclose.
The right hon. Gentleman has spoken
very freely about the secret services and
speculated about their control, their
organisation, and their efficiency. I am
IA 0 2fi
14 MAY 1956 Commander Crabb 1768
sorry to have to say that I am no pre-
pared to discuss those matters ii the -
House. It is easy?and I am not corn.
plaining?for the right hon. Gent ernan
to suggest or imply that all is not well.
I could not answer him, because I could
not answer him either generally or in
detail without disclosing matters
as he must recognise, must remain>,...cret.
That is why it is not the practice sod it
never has been the practice to ciscuss
these matters openly in the House. and I
am not prepared to break that precedent.
I think it must be clear that it must be
left to the discretion of Ministers to
decide these matters. Only the Minister
can judge; his discretion in this partial-
lar respect is absolute. It should be clear
from this practice that the Minister can,
not disclose the reasons for his
Obviously, if he were to disci() sz his
reasons, it would be disclosing w)at he
judged to be contrary itself to the public
interest.
That is certainly the position n this
instance, and therefore on this particular
aspect of the matter I must tell the House
now that L have not one word trore to
say than I announced on Wednesday. But
I should like to comment on the ,econd
part of the statement which I nude in
the House last week and to whi_h the
right hon. Gentleman referred.
I then took the exceptional conrse of
making it plain that what was dwe
done without the authority o Her
Majesty's Ministers. That, of cou-se. In-
cludes all Her Majesty's Ministers .,id all
aspects of this affair. We all kr ow, re
fact, that many actions are taken by sr?
vants of the Crown for which the auth+
rity of Ministers is not asked t nd.
course, that must always be so in uni
complex society such as ours toda, The
right hon. Gentleman is perfectly correei
in saying that on these occasior it 4
nonetheless accepted that Minister of the
Government, collectively, are ressomi
to Parliament for the actions of relficiA
I pondered long before I depart, I froj
that axiom in this case, and I thi k
the Committee is, perhaps-----if I nay
so, entitled to know more of th
in the light of what the right hon, tIeve"-
man paid. itt tittri ittognep
special circumstances which, I
compelled me to state that ?4-',1
happened, or was thought to h.'
happened, had been done with ,ut tIt
authority of Ministers.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1769 .
At that tim
been conduct
with the Sovi,
plctely unawa
kind. Had I r
doubt would i
on the sincer
those discussit
and a very e
explains to
account, I th
very unusual i
statement.
That brings
statement whi,
which the rig
ferred. Havii
was done v
Ministers I al
it be known
being taken.
an answer to
man has just
ernment are ,
measures of c
be exercised
of this kind.
It has bee
another poir
Gentleman m
very much, tc
informing the
of our receip
of our reply
holding back
House ought
Of course, th
Note was del
by messenger
The Foreign
myself appro
tiovernment
Course, I was
!louse on
tiovernment
received our
(liscourteous,
disclosed dii
uch circums
So far. as I
absolutely ni
all civilised
beginning of
At the sai
ll see, tht
!nconsistent
C'ven to the
matement to
Pared the tw(
33 I)
tiancier Crabb 1768
[y that I am not pro.
those matters in the
?and I am not corn.
ight hon. Gentleman
/ that all is not well.
him, because I could
ither generally or In
losing matters which,
e, must remain secret.
ot the practice and it
e practice o discuss
y in the Hoe, and I
break that p cedent.
clear that it n
tion of Ministe
s. Only the
retion in this particu-
te. It should be clear
hat the Minister can-
tsons for his decision.
were to disclose his
)e disclosing what he
[ry itself to the public
the position in this
'ore on this particular
I must tell the House
ot one word more to
on Wednesday. But
mment on the second
-,,nt which I made in
-ek and to which the
an referred.
exceptional course of
.t what was done was
authority of Her
That, of course, in-
sty's Ministers and all
ir. We all know, in
fans are taken by ser-
for which the autho-
: not asked and, of
lways be so in any
a as ours today. The
n is perfectly correct
hese occasions it is
that Ministers of the
ively, are responsible
e actions of officials.
fore I departed from
se, and I think that
ehaps?if I may say
more of this topic
e right hon. Gentle-
instance there were
which, I judged,
state that what
thought to hav6
done without the
Approved For Release 2003/02127 : CIA-RDP80130-1676R000900070003-5
1769 The Case of 14 MAY 1956 Commander Crab!) 1170
ci
At that time my colleagues and I had
been conducting important discussions
with the Soviet leaders. We were com-
pletely unaware of any episode of this
kind. Had I not made that clear publicly,
doubt would inevitably have been thrown
on the sincerity of our position during
those discussions. That iN a vary nartptat
and a very exceptional situation, but it
explains to the House why, on that
account. I thought it right to take the
very unusual course I did of making that
statement.
That brings me to the third part of the
statement which I made last week and to
which the right hon. Gentleman has re-
ferred. Having made it clear that what
was done without the authority of
Ministers I also found it necessary to let
it be known that disciplinary steps were
being taken. That in itself is, in part,
an answer to what the right hon. Gentle-
man has just said. It shows that the Gov-
ernment are determined that the proper
measures of control and authority should
be exercised by Ministers in all matters
of this kind.
It has been suggested?and this was
another point which the right hon.
Gentleman made ;- and it has been made
very much, too, in the Press ?that by not
informing the House on Wednesday last
of our receipt of the Russian Note and
of our reply thereto I was in some way
holding back information of which the
House ought to have been made aware.
Of course, that was not so. The Soviet
Note was delivered to the Foreign Office
by messenger on Friday night, 4th May.
The Foreign Secretary being away ill, I
myself approved the answer to the Soviet
Government on Wednesday morning. Of
course, 1 was aware when I spoke to the
House on Wednesday that the Soviet
Government could not by then have
received our reply. It would have been
discourteous, to say the least, to have
disclosed diplomatic correspondence in
such circumstances, and I did not do so.
So far as I know that has been the
absolutely normal practice followed by
all civilised Governments from the
beginning of time.
At the same time, as the Committee
`will see, there is nothing in the least
inconsistent between the reply we have
given to the Soviet Government and my
statement to the House. I carefully com-
pared the two myself. The only difference
33 D 27
?and it is a difference?is that the reply
to the Soviet Note deals with the acta,al
queries raised in the Soviet communeia-
tion, whereas my reply to the House %IS
couched as a Parliamentary Answer.
Now, as to the later publication of the
Note, I realised, of (Mums that the SOVIA
Oovernment might publish both com-
munications. Of course, I understocd,
that. But even so, I submit to the Com-
mittee that it would not have been pos-
sible for me to communicate either the
facts or the texts of the Notes in advance
of the receipt of our reply by the Soviet
Government.
But in this business I do not rest only
on the national interest. The national
interest is of first importance to us in the
House of Commons, but there is also in
this business a very important inter-
national interest, and I confess that all
I care for is that the outcome of our din-
cussions with the Soviet leaders should
in truth prove to be, as I have said, the
beginning of a beginning. I intend te
safeguard that possibility at all costs. I
believe that that is also in the minds of
the Soviet leaders, and it is for that
reason that I deplore this debate and
will say no more.
9.2 p.m.
Mr. F. J. Bellenger (Bassetlaw) : May
1 say this by way of preface. The Soviet
Government is the 4ast Government on
earth to make an incident out of this
affair. But, listening to the Prime
Minister this evening, 1 would personally
have been quite content if he had stopped
short at the first part of his statement last
week. If he had said that this was a
matter of public security, I do not think
anybody could have questioned him on
his judgment.
The Prime Minister, however, went on
to open all sorts of speculative fields, as
he has done in the Press. Incidentally,
it seems a paradox that only the public
Press can discuss this matter more fully,
than Parliament. The Prime Minister
can apparently get up and say, as he said
tonight, "I have nothing to say," and
Parliament is gagged at once. But the
public Press is allowed to chase all sorts
of hares and to question all sorts of
people.
Where, possibly, the right hon. Gentle-
man the Prime Minister has made a mis-
take is in saying that he was going to
take disciplinary action and not tell the
Approved For Release 2003102/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1771
The Case
.14 MAY, 1956 Commaftder Crabb 1772
? [MR. BELLENGER.]
House what that action was to be. We
may be stopped from questioning the
Prime Minister, I understand, because of
public security considerations, but surely
Parliament has a right to ask the Prime
Minister whether he is acting rightly in
taking disciplinary action against some
person or persons unknown.
- After all, Parliament is the protector
of the individual, and, for all we know,
the Prime Minister may be making a
mistake, as the Government has done
before, notably in the Burgess and
Maclean case, which to a certain extent
disclosed similar errors of judgment on
the part of officials, and Parliament has
no method of redress. All that can
happen is that a committee of Privy
Councillors is set up, some whitewashing
statement is made and Parliament has to
accept it.
I do not want to question the Prime
Minister any more than my right hon.
Friend the Member for Leeds, South (Mr.
Gaitskell) did about the public security
issue. What I say to the Prime Minister
is this. Having been in charge of a
Service Department myself, I should like
to know whether he is quite sure that
Ministers, and Service Ministers particu-
larly, have complete control over their
Secret Service, their Intelligence, as he
led us to believe in what he said tonight.
I should not be at all surprised if Service
Ministers, in particular, do not know what
their Intelligence does. Yet they are
asked to take complete responsibility,
even to signing for the expenditure of
these secret service sections of their
Departments, without knowing one iota
of what is happening.
If we are to have a Secret Service,
surely it should be secret. In this case.
qt has been nothing of the sort; the news-
papers have been allowed to speculate.
The Prime Minister may say we would
surely not ask him to exercise any control
over the public Press. He asks Parlia-
ment to be discreet: why does he not
ask thg newsnapers to act in the same
way? Every morning, as the Prime
Minister knows, there is a conference at
the Foreign Office which journalists are
able to attend and question the official
spokesmen. Why, therefore, can the
-Prime Minister, or somebody else, not
make sure that not only is Parliament
stopped from pursuing these matters fully,
33 D 28
but, also, that some restraint is exercised
by the public Press, especially, the popular
Press, which may do a great deal of
damage to international and national
security?
Obviously, we cannot pursue this matter
further by asking the Prime Minister to
divulge what actually did happen; but,
in spite of what he said, the public are
disturbed at something happening which
ought not to have happened, and the
public is further of the opinion?as.
think, are many hon. Members of this
Committee?that neither the Prime
Minister nor his Departmental Ministers
have over the Secret Service that control
which Parliament voting the money.
would expect.
I would, therefore, ask the Prime
Minister whether he can take some action
to ensure that bureaucrats and public
officials do not cut right across the policy
of the Government of the day and cause
international tension, as might have been
possible in this case, which has enabled
the Soviet Government to hold this
country and Her Majesty's Government
up to ridicule.
9.7 p.m.
Sir Patrick Spens (Kensington, South):
I want to say a few words tonight on
the constitutional aspect of this debate,
1 am old enough, and I have been long
enough a Member of the House. to have
been present on many an occasion when
the House desired to get information
from Ministers of the Crown and the
Ministers claimed they were quite unable
to answer on the ground of public
security. Time after time, when that has
happened, that has been an end of the
matter. This is the first -time in my
experience that a responsible Opposition
has, through a most responsible leader,
in a most responsible speech. none the
less done what I consider to be a most
irresponsible thing. It has followed the
line which the right hon. Gentleman the
Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Bellenger)
condemns in the Press. It has tried to
get information on a matter of public
security by baiting the ktrlttid Watts
by a series of questions.
I very nearly rose on a point of order
when the debate began, because I believe
that this debate is contrary to all out
precedents. I do not believe that e?et
before, when a solemn answer has been
.given on one day of the week that te
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1-771 The Ca
V information t
lost public pol
public interest, h
irried further?sti
te of this natu
-I-. Percy Colic]
ight hon. am
this Chambe
P. Spens: '
vini.ter of the t
s.1)onsibility upon
ssible to give t
c.iisc public secu
i? e.; no other rest
f or outside
.1,tt mot to carry thc
. It is the resp(
.1n ilways has bee
J-i:d answer whe
i this debate
a practice had r
b-t way in which
n g ht.
Mr. Donald Ch
ifield) rose?
P. Spens: Le
iponsibility lit
ire Crown for the
t cos not matter t
wneo they are in
a tement that it
rf(rrnation becausi
rst public secui
e House, by a s(
ti,grIng at the Mini
t him to go 1.
opinion. There we:
nor which was
,ter tonight, b
hon. Gentlemen or
i answered wot
in ny right hon. .
thing that he
lose.
Nlt. Chapman:
,
Sr P. Spens TI
intir b a matter of p
tl'i".? else. There
as long as I hi
niuch to do witl
does not know
C police have to
;.,ty,ests of public
;?.k. Chapman: '
w
33 D 29
nder Crabb 1772
2straint is exercised
pecially the popular
) a great deal of
)nal and national
pursue this matter
Prime Minister to
did happen; but,
ow, flip public are
g happening which
happened, and the
the opinion?as, I
Members of this
ither the Prime
artmental Ministers
Service that control
roting the money
2, ask the Prime
an take some action
mcrats and public
ht across the policy
the day and cause
as might have been
which has enabled
tent to hold this
jesty's Government
(ensington, South):
? words tonight on
lect of this debate,
I I have been long
the House, to have
an occasion when
:o get information
le Crown and the
I were quite unable
ground of public
ime, when that has
:..?en an end of the
first time in my
nsible Opposition
responsible leader,
speech, none the
Eder to be a most
has followed the
-n. Gentleman the
- (Mr. Bellenger)
It has tried to
matter of public
t Prime Minister
S.
a point of order
because I believe
trary to all our
-elieve that ever
answer has been
se week that to
!Approved For Releast- OPIStEle467614041119.0.0.019003-5
I773
The Case of
14 MAY 1956 Commander Crabb 1774
give information to the House will be
against public policy and against the
public interest, has the matter been
can., further?still less, by a planned
debate of this nature.
Mr. Percy Collick (Birkenhead) : Does
the right hon. and Icarnod tientleman
think this Chamber is the Reichstag?
Sir P. Spens: Once the responsible
Minister of the Crown, accepting full
responsibility upon himself, has said it is
impossible to give the public information
because public security is involved, it be-
hoves no other responsible citizen, be he
inside or outside this Committee, to
attempt to carry the matter further in this
way. It is the responsibility of Ministers,
and always has been to give, such a con-
sidered answer when the occasion arises.
Until this debate was opened tonight,
that practice had never been challenged
in the way in which it is being challenged
tonight.
Mr. Donald Chapman (Birmingham,
Northfield) rose----
Sir P. Spens: Let me finish.
Responsibility lies with Ministers of
the Crown for the safety of the country.
It does not matter who the Ministers are.
When they are in office and they make
a statement that it is impossible to give
information because to do so would be
against public security, it is hopeless for
the House, by a series of questions, by
digging at the Minister concerned, to try
to get him to go against his considered
opinion. There was not one single ques-
tion which was asked of the Prime
Minister tonight, by either of the right
hon. Gentlemen opposite, which had it
been answered would not have resulted
in my right bon. Friend disclosing the
very thing that he has said he will not
disclose.
Mr. Chapman: What about the
police?
Sir P. Spens: The police are just as
much a matter of public security as any-
thing else. There is nobody who has
lived as long as I have, and who has had
as much to do with the law as I have,
who does not know that time after time
the police have to take action in the
interests of public security.
Mr. Chapman: They are above the
law.
33 13 29
Sir P. Spens: Of course, they are not
above the law?they are right within the
law. They are acting on their orders,
but the orders which are given to Thera
have been given them and cannot be dis-
closed for reasons of public security.
This goes to the very root of demo-
cracy. We have a General Election and
we elect a Government, and we put into
the seat of Government men whom the
country chooses and trusts. They are
responsible for the safety and security of
the country. When they give their con-
sidered view that the details of some-
thing cannot be disclosed because it is
a question of public security, then I say
that every responsible citizen, inside the
House and outside, must accept that, and
accept it willingly, as the very basis of
public security.
9.13 p.m.
Mr. John Dugdale (West Bromwich):
The Prime Minister's statement that it
was deplorable that there should be a
debate has been answered by the very
responsible manner in which my right
hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition
raised the debate. Had we not raised
this subject, we as an Opposition would
have been guilty of a grave dereliction
of duty in not probing a little further
into this affair.
The Prime Minister says that he can-
not answer certain questions?of course.
he cannot. We agree there are many
questions he cannot answer.
Mr. Sydney Silverman (Nelson and
Coln): But there are some questions
which he can answer.
Mr. Dugdale: Yes, there are some
questions which he can answer. Some of
the questions which my right hon. Friend
asked him he could answer.
The thing we are concerned with is
what appears to be the great lack of co-
ordination between different Departments.
What was the aim of this operation? Its
aim. apparently, was to get information
for the Navy, and yet the Commander-
in-Chief at Portsmouth did not want the
operation to take place. Surely he must
have had some say. Surely somebody
pays attention to what he says. When it
was known, as it was known?it must
have been known?by the Admiralty that
this operation was to take place, surely
the information should have been con-
veyed to the First Lord of the Admiral,-
Approved For Release 2003102127 : CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1775 The Case of
[MR. DUGDALE.].
? The Prime Minister says that the First
Lord of the Admiralty did not know.
Naturally, I accept the Prime Minister's
word for it, but that is a deplorable state
of affairs when it is the First Lord of the
Admiralty who has to make political
decisions, if he has to do anything at all
in the Admiralty. Surely he should be
the person to make the decision.
How do we know that the naval officers
at Portsmouth did know about it? Com-
mander Crabb asked to borrow equip-
ment from H.M.S. " Vernon " and he
was refused. It was said there, "We
shall not lend you the equipment ".
Obviously, he wanted to get accommoda-
tion of the most convenient character,
and, naturally, he would have stayed in
an Admiralty establishment, or else in a
private house belonging to an officer of
the Admiralty, if he could, but the
Admiralty did not want him to do so.
and the Commander-in-Chief. Ports-
mouth, did not want him to. So he had
to resort to this extraordinary business of
staying in an hotel, and signing the
register, while his companion signed it
with the wrong name.
If the Commander-in-Chief, Ports-
mouth, had really wanted this to take
place, surely he would have given some
help to Commander Crabb. Apparently,
no help was given. If he did not want it
to take place he would have conveyed his
disapproval to the Admiralty. It seems
very strange that one of the high rank
of the Commander-in-Chief, Portsmouth,
should not be able somehow or another
to reach a member of the Board of
Admiralty. I cannot understand where
the stoppage took place en route, but,
apparently, there was a stoppage some-
where, and, apparently, the information
never reached the Board of Admiralty.
-.a
14 MAY 1956 Commander Crabb 1776
These are some of the things for which
we condemn the Government. I do not
say we want to know about them. We
shall not ask any questions about them,
[HON. MEMBERS: " Oh, no."] We will
not. However, we do ask the Prime
Minister to see that the Admiralty and
the Secret Service are reorganised in
such a way that these things do not occur
again. Plainly, there has been a stoppage
in the flow of information which should
have flowed to the top, where decision
lies, and it is the responsibility of the
Prime Minister to see that this sort of
ApprothitgRiorsRukkosP2008*2/27 : CIA-RDONOBO1tIFORW3,091Y676011M.
33 D 30
The right hon. Gentleman says titat he
is not responsible for the details of S:eret
Service work. Of course he is not, and
we do not want to ask him ques:ions
about them, but we do say he ha, the
responsibility for choosing the pt ople
who should be at the top of the Scret
Service, and we want to know that he
has confidence in their judgment. We
Want to know, in particular, that whn he
says that disciplinary action has been
taken it has been taken not against jimior
people but against those at the tcr for -
failing to control those below them. Per-
haps these things have been done. I do
not know. However, it seems tn nie
likely that they may not have been done.
A few years ago there was a case vhich
was called the Crichel Down case It
was a very different type of case, hot as
in this case a Minister was apparmtly
misled by his officials and got into a Treat
deal of difficulty. He had the cowl te to
accept responsibility, and he resirned.
His action was very creditable indeed and
we on this side of the Committee re,pcet
him for it, as. I think, many hon. Fr ,:nth
of his opposite do.
I think that the Prime Minister 4hould
have given us a very much clearer es-
planation, and that he must reassur: us.
if we are to rest content with wh:: he
says, that steps are being taken :so to
reorganise both the Secret Service and
the Admiralty that this sort of thing can
never happen again.
9.19 p.m.
Lieut.-Colonel J. K. Cordeaux (Net
ham, Central): The right hon. Genth Tan
the Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Belle ler)
was deploring the publicity that thk un-
fortunate episode has obtained in the
Press. I am sure we all agree with hint
about that. However, I am suit T.e.
should not all agree with him when he
suggests that it might have been obt\ idttAl
by a hint from Ministers. I think that
would have been deplored by , ino3t
peopla, The fault for that publiuil,
mainly. I am sorry to. say, with the t ,ei
bers of the various secret services con-
cerned.
In former times it was the first rti 0 for
all members of those services NI th:
nature of their work must never bt dis-
closed to another man or woman.
fact,
fact. it was their duty to carry the
of their adventures and triumphs with;
"f77 - ? ? 71
:here have bee
not been living
nave been cash
of secret work
newspaper artic
A- they do that.
Anich when cc
Their blunders
It was only IL
lebating in th
which concerr
ervices, in thai
We were deb,
'largess and
-vhich seemed
n conjunction
r)r. Nunn May
-'ontecorvo, wl
.ion, to feel t
dealing with a
?the man wh
-ea son of pers(
'mars loyalty to
oyalty to his 0.
believe thz
is to lose faith
'resent in the.
tositive espion
:111, this partici
,.f Burgess and
here is certa
? .therwise?an
!ink that on a
-fly right to cot
gc services, m
Indeed, in r
'Ylember for Le
"ho did critici;
hould like to c
.ay by quotin
.vhich were ma
'he very best
.fficers in Ger:
!,f the German
fl Holland dui
?vho was himst
The greatest dis
ti undergrou,
f,mke, and -wit
.nern was this:
" t was now
peer westwards ai
, etivity was takh
?n those dark sr
'Item?activity ol
'ng experience
; the conduct o
,ad .11. whole ser
,revious year in
had show
23 D 31
?ApprosTarra-Retease-213044121-27?: CIA-RDP801301676R000900070003-5
mmander CraPb 1776
Gentleman says that he
for the details of Secret
tf course he is not, and
to ask him questions
we do say he has the
r choosing the people
it the top of the Secret
want to know that he
n their judgment. We
particular, that when he
hoary action has been
taken not against junior
ist those at the top for
those below them. Per.
have been done. I do
wever, it seems to me
nay not have been done,
;o there was a case which
Crichel Down case. It
rent type of case, but as
Vlinister was apparently
cials and got into a great
He had the courage to
)ility, and he resigned,
ry creditable indeed, and
sf the Committee respect
think, many hon. Friends
lo.
le Prime Minister should
i very much clearer ex-
hat he must reassure us,
st content with what he
are being taken so to
the Secret Service and
-tat this sort of thing can
am.
J. K. Cordeaux (Notting-
-he right hon. Gentleman
3assetlaw (Mr. Bellengcr)
e publicity that this un-
has obtained in the
we all agree with him
nwever. I am sure we
gree with him when he
ight have been obviated
Ministers. I think that
Dn deplored by most
it for that publicity lies
y to say, with the mem-
.tis secret services con-
it was the first rule for
_hose services that the
Drk must never be dis-
man or woman. In
uty to carry the secrets
:s and triumphs with
Unfortunately, lately
1777 ? The Case al 14 MAY 1956
there have been some people who have
not been living up to that tradition, but
have been cashing in on their knowledge
of secret work in the form of film rights,
newspaper articles and books. Of course.
if they do that, they cannot compl.ttin tee
much when equal publicity is given to
their blunders and failures.
It was only last November that we were
debating in the House another episode
which concerned one of our secret
services, in that case our security service.
We were debating the failure in the
Burgess and Maclean case, a failure
which seemed all the worse when taken
in conjunction with the previous cases of
Dr. Nunn May, Dr: Fuchs, and Professor
Pontecorvo, which lead us, in conjunc-
tion, to feel that we were engaged in
dealing with a new type of enemy agent
?the man who works, not for the old
reason of personal gain, but because he
puts loyalty to a political ideology before
loyalty to his own country.
I believe that it would be wrong for
us to lose faith in the services that are at
present in the. dock?that is to say, our
positive espionage work?because, after
all, this particular case, unlike the case
of Burgess and Maclean, is, I suggest?
there is certainly nothing to suggest
otherwise?an isolated case. I do not
think that on the strength of that we have
any right to condemn our positive espion-
age services, whatever they may be, as
inefficient.
Indeed, in answer to the right hon.
Member for Leeds, South (Mr. Gaitskell),
who did criticise them for inefficiency, I
should like to condense what I wanted to
say by quoting to him some remarks
which were made about them by one of
the very best known counter-espionage
officers in Germany. He was the head
of the German counter-espionage forces
in Holland during the last war?a man
who was himself responsible for one of
the greatest disasters that ever befell our
own underground forces. His name was
Giske, and what he had to say about
them was this:
"I was now facing my own problem, to
peer westwards and discover what secret enemy
activity was taking place beneath those stars.
on those dark waters, and in the air above
them?activity of an enemy famous for his
long experience and unexcelled in his skill
at the conduct of underground warfare. We,
had a whole series of instructive lessons the
previous year in France, Norway and Greece;
which had shown me clearly,.what it might
33 D 35
Commander Crabb 1778'
mean to face the experienced toughness of the
British Secret Service in combination with an
elite of Dutch volunteers willing to risk heir
lives."
From that, I do not mean that I Ara
trying to entitle the eonduet of the ora.
tion which we have under discussion to.
night. It would be impossible to do so.
It seems to me that it was approved mis-
takenly and rashly and was iner tly
carried out. Indeed, one feels alartned
for the higher direction of whatever sr-
vice might be concerned when we ci.,a-
sider that, after all, although initiative is
one of the greatest qualities required ia
any such service, it seems incredible that
such an operation could have been sane.
tioned except by the head of whatever
organisation it was. It is strange and
unfortunate that it was done even by such
a person without informing someone of
still more importance.
To the non-technical critic it seems
that the positive information that might
be obtained would in no way be commen-
surate with the seriousness of the act and
the natural embarrassment to inter-
national relations which would follow.
Lower down the scale in the planning and
conduct of the operation, Commander
Crabb was of an age where he should
hardly have been chosen for an operation
so hazardous and difficult. The entry
the hotel register and the clumsy attempt
at deletion suggest a quality in trade
craft to which it is best not to refer.
I referred just now to the embarrass-
ment to international relations which
such a failure might cause. I am certain
that no stronger phrase would be here
applicable. After all, the duty of every
intelligence service is to obtain informa-
tion about the war potential of other
countries and it is the duty of secret in- -
telligence services to obtain such informa-
tion secretly. Every major Power, our- '
selves, the United States, Russia and all
the rest, as the right hon. Member for
Leeds, South said, employs such services
and such services have been employed
since the beginning of history.
Other weapons have come and gone.
In the course of a few hundred years
we have seen the bow and arrow give way
to the cannon ball and gunpowder, and
from that we have gone to high explosive,
aircraft, tanks, poison gas and guided
missiles to the final horror of the
hydrogen bomb; but espionage has re-
mained constant. and an essential brane
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27: CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1779 - ? The Case of
. [LIEUT.-COLONEL CORDEAUX.1 -
of war. The spy?the secret agent it is
better to call him?has remained and has
always been the oldest of all weapons,
indeed, dating from 3,400 years ago, as
we can read in Joshua, Chapter 2:
.. Joshua the son of Nun sent out of
Shittim two men to spy secretly. . . ."
For that reason, I am absolutely con-
vinced that the Russians will attach very
little importance to this episode. The
right hon. Member for Leeds, South said
so in so many words. I think that the
Russians will be very little irritated by
it, just as they will not expect us to be
particularlyirritated by the episode of
Burgess and Maclean.
The two episodes were the same in
that they were normal?I think I can use
the word "normal "?use of espionage.
They differed in that the Russian employ-
ment of Burgess and Maclean was
brilliantly successful, whereas our effort
to inspect the hull of the Russian cruiser
Was not. They differed in another
respect, namely, that the Russian Govern-
ment did know of the employment of
Burgess and Maclean, whereas my right
? bon. Friend the Prime Minister did not
? know of the employment of Commander
Crabb.
It is perfectly obvious that the Russians
have neither the right, nor are they likely
to object?I do not think that that is
putting it too high?even in their hearts
? to what has happened. This un-
fortunate episode is, therefore, not in the
least likely in any way to impair the
iralue of the Russian visit to this country,
itor in any way to detract from the magni-
ficent job which my right hon. Friend
the Prime Minister has done, not merely
in organising that visit, but in the
brilliant manner in which he conducted
the negotiations here.
Finally. I want to add my tribute to the
central figure of this operation. Who-
ever may have employed Commander
Crabb, he obeyed his orders, he was a
patriot and he was a brave man. In
paying my tribute to him I would like to
think that I am also paying It to all the
thousands of other men of his profession,
the other agents who have served and
died for this country.
The secret agent in war, though not
always in peace, is the bravest man of
all. The ordinary soldier, sailor and
airman face danger willingly, but they
33032
14 MAY 1956 Commander Crabb 17110
face it in comradeship. The secret agesit
faces it alone. The soldier, the sailor
and the airman face death willingly, but
death is the worst thing they face. To tir!',
secret agent who is captured death is
probably not to him the ultimate sacrifte:
which he hopes to avoid, but the mere& I
relief for which he prays. So 1 how
very much that though this unfortunate
episode, the last in Commander Crabb s
life, may be forgotten as soon as possible.
?he and his former record will never be
forgotten.
9.32 p.m.
Mr. George Wigg (Dudley) : If te
obituary notice in The Times is to be
believed, Commander Crabb rejoined ti
Royal Navy over a year ago. So I Jo n
with my right hon. Friend the Memb
for Leeds, South (Mr. Gaitskel]) in payir.g
a tribute to the memory of a very gallAtt
officer.
When I listened to the concluding warts
of the Prime Minister I felt that tl-is
was a masterly exposition by a great
Parliamentarian. The right hon. GenPe-
man had control of the House and was
saying to us that the national inter( it
must be paramount but, over and above
that, the one thing he wanted is to et
agreement with the Russians. That is
the recipe of the Prime Minister tonie it,
his excuse for trying to rescue his pasty
from a difficult position?[An Horr.
MEMBER: "Try to rescue yourself."] I
shall come to that in a moment, with no
holds barred.
Those noble words were not the words
of the handout issued by the Conservat ve
Party Central Office of his Perth spetch
last week. There the right hon. Cole-
man could not resist a cheap party JL ,e.
The Prime Minister said:
"To be strong you do not need to be rrp:e;
to be firm, you do not need to be rude.'
There, of course, the Prime Minister was
not talking about Anglo-Soviet relations
as something that transcended even :he
national interest the right hon. Get ce
man was seeking to make party capitt
the loweat possible level. Iiio tot c t
plain of that but, of course, if tlig t),ht
hon. Gentleman says that at Perth -ad
then makes the peroration that he (1-'0
tonight, perhaps I shall be forgiven it
thought passes through try mind-1u ls
an able Parliamentariar. . he is a
complete humbug.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27: CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
- JS1 The(
What the hon.
mtingham, C
deaux) said s,
Gentleman
Lord nor the Fir
holding their pet
wItitout pressing
pont of secrecy,
tic night of 29th
o' the Board
p itical or nava,
?ti a- statement ti
1) :A met his di
Departm
country and
t ens have been
s,t_ge of internat
ut the knowled
political or
tither or both,
prompting fror
'welchers, should
o the Prime M
The central p
vhat Command,
vim instructed Ii
the night of :
'!? e Admiralty,
.1 id without any
ttered the infore
sible for what I
Crabb.
There is one
which I ask th
leve that I fe,
e does. I a
out the state
ountry. I ?be
:,eplorably WC11
tie fact that v
:noney have be
i.s I watch the
paganda that i
he Admiralty
?action to justi1
if ?350 millior
What did
tose who ins
out? Surely it
;c, justify the
'Icing put acrt
Russian fleet i
the maintainir
forces. I bel
taking places
jeopardy, for
expenditure h
for calm and
fore, from eve
33 1) 3
manderCrabb 1780
hip. The secret agent
he soldier, the sailor
:e death willingly, but
ling they face. To the
is captured death is
the ultimate sacrifice
tvoid, but the merciful
e prays. So I hope
augh this unfortunate
Commander Cr abb's
.:.11 as soon as possible,
record will never be
gg (Dudley) : If the
The Times is to be
er Crabb rejoined the
year ago. So I join
. Friend the Member
fr. Gaitskell) in paying
nory of a very gallant
the concluding words
ister I felt that this
position by a great
'he right hon. Gentle-
the House and was
the national interest
but, over and above
he wanted is to get
Russians. That is
ime Minister tonight,
[g to rescue his party
position?[An HON.
rescue yourself."] I
'n a moment, with no
s were not the words
by the Conservative
of his Perth speech
ie right hon. Gentle-
: a cheap party jibe.
said:
not need to be mute:
need to be rude."
Prime Minister was
lglo-Soviet relations
anscended even the
right hon. Gentle-
ake party capital at
/el. I do not corn-
course, if the right
that at Perth and
ation that he does
1 be forgiven if the
Ti my mind?he is
n but he is? also a
roved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80B01676R000966070003=5"
71781 The Case of 14 MAY 1956
What the hon. and gallant Member for
Nottingham, Central (Lieut.-Colonel
Cordeaux) said spelled out for the right
hon. Gentleman that neither the First
Lord nor the First Sea Lord should be
holding their present offices. Because,
without pressing the Government on any
point of secrecy, it Pi unttonlabla that on
the night of 29th April a senior Member
of the Board of Admiralty, either
political or naval, must have authorised
the statement that Commander Crabb
had met his death. If, therefore, a
Service Department has to disclose to
the country and to the world that opera-
tions have been undertaken at a delicate
stage of international negotiations with-
out the knowledge or consent of either
the political or the Service chiefs, then
either or both, without waiting for any
prompting from Conservative back
benchers, should tender their resignations
to the Prime Minister.
The central point of this story is not
what Commander Crabb was up to or
? who instructed him, but the communiqu6-
of the night of 29th April, because there
the Admiralty, without being pressed
and without any Press prompting, volun-
teered the information that it was respon-
sible for what happened to Commander
Crabb.
There is one other very serious matter
Which I ask the Prime Minister to be-
lieve that I feel about as sincerely as
he does. I am desperately concerned
about the state of the defences of this
country. I believe our defences to be
deplorably weak in all aspects despite
the fact that very large sums of public
money have been spent. It is my belief,
as I watch the continuous stream of pro-
paganda that is being poured out, that
the Admiralty is fighting a rearguard
action to justify an annual expenditure
of ?350 million.
What did Commander Crabb and
those who instructed him hope to find
? out? Surely it was in the hope of trying
to justify the Admiralty view that is
being put across to the public that the
Russian fleet is a menace, which justifies
the maintaining of our expensive naval
forces. I believe that such an under-
taking places the public interest in
jeopardy, for decisions as to how defence
expenditure is to be made is a matter
for calm and deliberate choice. There-
fore, from every point of view this opera-
33 0 33
Commander Crabb I 782
tion and the Government's attitude act
be condemned.
Turning to the speech of the right b
and learned Member for Kensington,
South (Sir P. Spens), I must say tha, I
really was shocked. He is a learned tind
hishly rtgafteat(41MijUif ot this Flott,e.
I am very loath indeed to say this, t at
the arguments that he used were the Id id
of arguments that a lickspittle in tie
Nazi Party would have used if he lvtd
wanted to curry favour with Hitler.
9.37 p.m.
Sir James Hutchison (Glasgow, SCCits-.
toun): The main burden of the speedi
of the right hon. Member for Bassetla
(Mr. Bellenger) rested on his criticism
that the lack of further information from
my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister
prevented hon. Members from bele
able to do what the Press is able to dr.
namely to probe and speculate. I third
-
that criticism has been very completely
answered by the speeches which haw?
been delivered from both sides of tilt
Committee, in which speculation has run
riot.
I should like to make an appeal. This
is a period of restraint and of appeals
for restraint, and I think that nothing
but good could come if we followed that
example after the debate is concluded. I
would go further and ask that the whole
theme be muted down. We have paid
our tributes to a gallant man, and I think
that thereafter the whole story should be
allowed to lapse into the shadows which
are its proper background.
My reasons for asking that are as
follows. First, let us be realists. I think
that most hon. Members who have
spoken tonight have recognised that we
are not by any means the only nation
with a secret service. All nations have
secret services, and the job of these ser-
vices is to get secret information. Believe
me, the Russians are no amateurs in this.
Can that be why they? are so little worried
by the whole incident?
I was greatly puzzled to discover from
the speech by my hon. and gallant Friend
the Member for Nottingham, Central
(Lieut.-Colonel Cordeaux) whether he felt
that this was a matter of great irritation
internationally or that it would count for
nothing at all. At the beginning of his
speech he said the first thing, and at the
end he said the second,....
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1783 The Case of
[Sir 3. Hisransoti.]
It seems to me that the Russian leaders
have treated the incident in its proper pro-
portion. It is true that a protest was
made and an apology was sent, but they
appear to be much more prepared to
allow the matter to fade into the back-
ground where it belongs than are our
Press and the Opposition tonight. The
longer this matter goes on the more
chance is there of friction being developed
?international friction which. I believe,
both sides of the House are anxious to
dispel.
? There is no doubt that the visit of the
two Russian leaders did good. In this
matter protocol has been followed pro-
perly in the relationship and the mes-
sages which have passed between the two
countries. Is it for this reason that one
of the newspapers was able to write that
Marshal Bulganin and Mr. Khrushchev
were too pleased with the London visit
to make an issue out of this curious and
unexpected lapse? That is the answer,
I think, to the right hon. Gentleman who
was so worried, in the speech which we
listened to this evening, as to whether in
fact international friction had been
created.
Mr. Chapman : Did not the Prime Min-
ister end by saying that what he cared
for most was that this matter should not
disturb international relations and, there-
fore, on that account, refused to talk
about the matter any further?
Sir J. Hutchison: I am saying that that
that is the proper way to treat it. The
more we argue about a thing like this
the more we tend to upset international
relations.
The other reason why I think that this
matter should be treated with restraint
and, indeed, with oblivion is that this
thirst for unusual and rather obscure
knowledge does nothing but harm to the
Secret Service itself. Either we have a
Secret Service or we do not. If we are
going to have one, do not let us go on
trying to persuade it to do a sort of strip-
tease act and cast aside one veil after
another. The methods and organisation
of the Secret Service are very important
matters, and the more we discuss and
probe them, the more we tend to reveal,
as would have happened if my right hon.
Friend had been led on a little further,
and that does nothing but damage to the
service. We are making the task of
331) 34
14 MAY 1956
Commander Crabb Ina
those who are serving and those en;aged
on a delicate and sometimes dangerous
task all the more difficult. Discussion
and limelight can do nothing but tarm,
and limelight is the very last thint that
any one employed in this sort of work
could possibly want to have.
What good, then, is this debate loing
to do? If it was a question of showing
up gaucherie?and there has been
gaucherie?that has been noted ant; will
be put right. If it was disciplinary action
that was wanted that has already been
announced, and surely the right hon.
Gentleman will accept that if disciplinary
action is used it will be used on the
person on whom it should fall and not
on some one else. [An HON. MEMBER:
"Which one?"] There can be no pur-
pose in using disciplinary action ir any
other way. If, on the other hand, the.
purpose is to diminish the stature cf the
Prime Minister, the debate has biles!, or
if hon. Gentlemen opposite are se:king
for another Minister's head on a chrger
then the debate will equally have f tiled.
There can be no good purpos: in
deepening this probe any further, and I
hope that the matter will be allow-J to
fade into oblivion.
9.44 p.m.
Mr. R. H. S. Crossman (Coventry.
East): I think that the best answer given
to the hon. Member for Scotstoun Nr J.
Hutchison) was given by his hon. and
gallant Friend the Member for Noi tine-
ham, Central (Lieut.-Colonel Corde tux).
I think that my right hon. and hon.
Friends will agree with me when 1 say
that it is no disparagement of then] to
say that no speech was more full of ,roi?
mate, expert knowledge. Here was sAine-
one who knew what he was talking aliout,
someone very close to Intelligence who
could be spendidly frank, splendidly i idhr-
creet and really tell the Prime Mit liter
what was wrong. We need only to rod
that speech in HANSARD tomorrow In ce
the very serious problems which 1.k e
raised, and they are not to do, at: el;
hon. and gallant Member rightly
with tho Sdefat Survieo.
I want to concentrate on the part
played by the Admiralty in this a Lu.
My hon. Friend the Member for Duil.1'
(Mr. Wigg) partly raised this point
I want to go on from where he left
With regard to the communique of :911
April. is it really said that the First
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1785
of the Admi
here? did not
that they ha(
it, and that
which, if on
refuses respc
I can app:
for an act
,cannot unde
sibility for is
which has E
deceit, issued
contradiction
the Russian
a question of
of the incom
Either they
munique was
trusted them
late hour the
of the disa
under their
and they wer
I must sa3
this unctions
international
suspected th
interests bei
suspect that
took over ti
convenient
,e.ing put
Admiralty v
themselves v
Prime Minist
defects, is n
His was a m
thought only
The right
dreamed of
the First Sea
Admiralty, ti-
nientary Sec
;Nothing to di
Gentleman w
of internatioi
thinking abc
5...,:eretary. V
l!nglo-Russia
irose four p
register? Nc
why th
,(), this is a
Ilona) interest
support c
non. Gentlem
very hard lin
secret depart
goes wrong
33 D
ander Crabb 1784
g and those engaged
?meanies dangerous
difficult. Discussion
D nothing but harm,
very last thing that
Ln this sort of work
to have.
is this debate going
question of showing
there has been
been noted and will
as disciplinary action
at has already been
rely the right hon.
'it that if disciplinary
rill be used on the
should fall and not
[An HON. MEMBER :
iere can be no pur-
linary action in any
the other hand, the
sh the stature of the
debate has failed, or
opposite are seeking
's head on a charger
equally have failed.
good purpose in
any further, and I
r will be allowed to
:rossman (Coventry,
:ie best answer given
for Scotstoun (Sir J.
Al by his hon. and
lember for Notting,
-Colonel Cordeaux),
ght hon. and hon.
with me when I say
gement of them to
as more full of inti-
e. Here was some-
_e was talking about,
to Intelligence who
_nk, splendidly indis-
the Prime Minister
c need only to read
RD tomorrow to See
:?oblems which we
not to do, as the
mber rightly says.
2e.
trate on the part
rally in this affair.
vlember for Dudley
ised this point and
where he left off.
Dmmunique of 29th
that the First Lord
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1785 The Cale o, 14 MA
of the Admiralty or the gentlemen down
here did not know about it? Is it said
that they had absolutely no knowledge of
it, and that it is the sort of thing for
which, if one has no knowledge of it, one
aluses responsibility?
I can appreciate refusing responsibility
for an act of the Secret Service, but I
cannot understand shelving the respon-
sibility for issuing a public communiqu?
which has been proved to be a lie, a
deceit, issued by the Admiralty in grave
contradiction to what had been stated to
the Russian visiting admiral. This is not
a question of the Secret Service, but either
of the incompetence or lies of Ministers.
Either they did not know that the com-
muniqu?as being issued and the services
trusted them so little that even -at that
late hour they did not inform the Minister
of the disasters going on. ostensibly
under their responsibility, or they knew
and they were not telling the whole truth.
I must say that the more I heard in
this unetious debate about national and
international safety, the more I gravely
suspected that there were some party
interests being defended. I began to
suspect that when the Prime Minister
took over the matter. It was a very
convenient way to prevent questions
being put to representatives of the
Admiralty who might have defended
themselves very much worse than the
Prime Minister who, whatever his other
defects, is a brilliant Parliamentarian.
His was a magnificent performance. He
thought only of international interests.
The right hon. Gentleman never
dreamed of considering the problem of
the First Sea Lord, the First Lord of the
Admiralty, the Civil Lord or the Parlia-
mentary Secretary to the Admiralty.
Nothing to do with them. The right hon.
Gentleman was thinking solely in terms
of? international interests. He was not
thinking about the unfortunate Home
Secretary. What has it got to do with
Anglo-Russian interests to discover that
those four pages were torn out of the
register? Nothing whatever. Have we
heard why the police went to the hotel?
No, this is all in the realm of interna-
tional interest. But it is not at all.
I support one other thing said by the
hon. Gentleman opposite. I think it is
very hard lines on people who work in
secret departments. When something
goes wrong they are blamed. If this
33 D 35
Y 1956
Commander Crabb 1786
business had gone right, would there
have been all this talk of disciplinary
action? Supposing that Commander
Crabb had come back safely from the
mission, should we then have had the
Prime Minister outraged by whet he had
done? What odious hypocrisy. There
would have been medals for success, but
when there is a slip-up, and Ministers
are in trouble, then we have all the
security and all the hocus-pocus about I
cannot tell you." Because somebody who
is a politician and also an official is in
trouble, the cover-up starts.
I think that the people of this country
have a perfect right, when they suspect
something as dirty as that, to express
their anxieties. Of course, we cannot
ultimately know the truth, but is it really
the Opposition's fault that this matter
has come to light? There has been a
deluge of publicity on the Secret Service
from the Admiralty. The Admiralty did
that and the Prime Minister then contra-
dicted the Admiralty and made matters
worse confounded by giving his own
peculiar version of his own self-sacrifice,
He said that if any Minister had known,
if any responsible civil servant had
known, they would never have dreamt of
allowing this to happen. I wonder.
We have lived for a long period in the
cold war. Speeches have been made in.
this House describing the Russians as the
enemy, and saying that there is no possi-
bility of negotiating with them. Speeches
were made by the Prime Minister, a short
time ago, describing as appeasement what
he is now doing. For years we have lived
in an atmosphere in which the idea of
treating the Russians not as an enemy
to be spied on was positively disloyal. I
cannot find it surprising that some mem-
bers of the Secret Service have not caught
up with the change of front of the Govern-
ment, which, suddenly, is all enamoured
of negotiation.
I can remember the time when the
right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir
W. Churchill) first suggested a high-level
conference and his Tory colleagues
howled him down and tried to sabotage
the conference. They succeeded in pre-
venting us having a conference for years,
[HON. MEMBERS: "Nonsense."] I Sus-
pect that some members of the Secret
Service, and possibly some high officials
in the Admiralty, are just a bit old-
fashioned. They are still living in the
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1787 The Case of
- [MR. CROSSMAN.]
cold war and taking seriously the direc-
tive of the Tory Government when they
came to power. Even some of my col-
leagues have constantly told me that the
Russians must be regarded simply and
solely as enemies of civilisation who
understand nothing but the language of
strength, and with whom it is hopeless
to believe that the ward " peace " is pos-
sible. If that is true, what is wrong with
sending frogmen under their cruisers? If
it is not true, some hon. Members oppo-
site will have to withdraw thousands of
words they have been speaking in the last
ten years.
Mr. Cyril Osborne (Louth): Surely the
hon. Member will agree that in the last
three years there has been a change of
Government in Russia and a different
policy there.
Mr. Crossman: The hon. Member and
I are iii surprising agreement on this sub-
ject. We probably agree with the
right hon. Member for Woodford who
tells us that the Russians ought to join in
the spirit of N.A.T.O. The hon. Member
and I agree at the moment, but other hon.
Members opposite will only agree two
years later. That is the point I am
making. He and I have gone far on this
subject, but the Prime Minister was not
one of the advance guard, nor were the
other right hon. and hon. Members on the
Front Bench. They were by no means in
the advance guard, and it ill becomes
them to rebuke members of the Civil
Service who just do not understand the
new world of international co-operation
in which the Prime Minister so fervently
believes.
If the Prime Minister believes that it
was outrageous to send that frogman
then there are one or two other
outrageous things which he might
polish up at the same time. We
seem to be still scared stiff of the Russians
disarming for fear they might be tricking
us into something. If it is really a crime
14 MAY 1956 Commander Crabb
Division No. 181.1
Ainsley, J. W,
Aibu, A. H.
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)
Allen, Arthur (Bosworth) -
Allen, Scholefield (Crewe)
Anderson, Frank
Awbery, S. S.
Bacon, Miss Alice
Baird, J.
D 36
1788
to send a frogman underneath their ;hips
and the" Prime Minister has dismissed
those who are responsible, I begin to see
other changes which might be mae in
our foreign policy. If they are now our
friends. I hope there will be full support
for the speech of the right hon. Member
for Woodford at Aachen, but I hay( not
.heard a word of support from the Prime
Minister for that. The Prime Mir Ister
says that we must treat the Russiat s as
allies in the noble venture of resisting
aggression all round. If that is the Prime
Minister's new spirit, I see great beiiiin-
nings in this debate?but, of course, I do
not believe a word of it. I know that this
is a cover-up. I know perfectly well :hat
if it had been successful and the whole
affair had not leaked out, no disciplinary
action would have been taken whatever.
I know that this is merely the blundt ring
of a politician in the Admiralty. (IloN.
MEMBERS: And the First Lord "./ We
will not mention the First Lord.
That is the whole problem; that is why
we have all these solicitudes for inter-
national relations in order to cover up
one of the biggest bungles ever comm qed
by a Service Department.
Mr. Gaitskell : To mark our disapprwal
of what the hon. and gallant Membet for
Nottingham, Central (Lieut.-Col -mel
Cordeaux) so well described as " thL
conceived and unhappy operation," and
in protest against the Prime Minis:r`s
complete refusal to answer any of our
questions, many of which, in our opinion
at least, could well have been answ!red
without endangering public security at all,
we shall be obliged to divide the
Committee.
I beg to move, That Class 1, Vat: 4,
Treasury and Subordinate Depart= Tits,
and Navy Estimates, Vote 12, Admir.:Ity
Office, be reduced by E5.
Question put, That a sum not excee(mg
?15 be granted for the said Service:-
The Committee divided: Ayes .29,
Noes 316.
41e.glit
Balfour, A.
Ballenger, Rt. Hon. F. J.
Bence, C. R. (Dunbartonshire, E.)
Bann, Ho. Wedgwood (Bristol, S.E.)
Benson, G.
BaswIck, F.
Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbe, Vale)
Blackburn, F.
Blenkinsop, A.
ge.f6
Boardman, H.
Bottomley, Rt. Hon. A. G.
Bowden, H. W. (Leicester, S.W.)
Bowles, F. G.
Boyd, T. C.
Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth
Brockway, A. F.
Broughton, Dr. A. D. D.
Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Bektit-'
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
7N4) The
prowl, Thomas (Ince)
entice, W. A.
tutuir, Herbert (Hackn
r wren, Mrs. Joyce (Wt
t aCaghan, L. J.
...ale, Mrs. B. A.
h..mpion, A. J.
( h pman, W. D.
rwtwynd, C. R.
wide, J.
t 0/thick, W.
e lick, P. H. (Dirket*
collets, V. ,1.(shoreditt
whet, Mrs. Freda
Fete, W. C.
.., :dam*, George (Bra
^ J. D.
,:r :swan, R. H. S.
opines, P.
)-lton, Rt. Hon. H.
).ting, George (1-111
)i.eles, Ernest (Enfielc
rrvies, Harold (Leek)
).vies, Stephen (Merl
). er, G.
Freitas, Geoffrey
Jilargy, H. J.
3.clds, N. N.
c-rmely, D. L.
'3..gdale, Rt. Ho. John
Ece, Rt. Hon. J. C.
Freiman, M.
trwards, Rt. Hon. Jo'
Towards, Rt. Hon. N,
E.;warde, Robert (BM
E,ans, Albert Oslingl
Evans, Edward (Low
r 'arts, Stanley (Wed,
r cityhough, E.
F nott, H. J.
F etcher, Erie
F-acer, Thomas (Has
Caltakell, Rt. Hon. H
CANion, C. W.
Cordon Walker, Rt. 1
Greenwood, Anthony
C,entell, Rt. Hon. I)
Frey, C. F.
Critriths, David (Rot
Crindhs, Rt. Hon. a
ciffiths, William
I ale, Leslie
? di, Rt. Hn. Clenvil
11?imilton, W. W.
annan, W.
astings, S.
' cyman, F. H.
ealey, Denis
c.nderson, Rt. Hn..
orincon, Miss M.
t-obson, C. R.
oughton, Douglas
Charlet (Pe
r ?wen, Denis (AR
ughes, Emrys (S?
ughes, Hector (At
tunter, A. E.
t-y4d, N. (Accringt
.goew, Cmdr, P. C
,itken, W. T.
rit. 4. Oland'
--drawl, C. J. M.
trlery, Julian, (Pre
lmory, Rt. Hn. He.
Rmtruther-Gray,
.rbuthnot, John
trmstrong, C. W.
"shton, H.
4tor, Hon. 4. 4.
'Atkins, H. E.
Redneck, Lt.?Cendr,
33 D 37
filer Crabb 1788
ierneath their ships
ster has dismissed
ible, I begin to sec.
might be made in
E they are now our
will be full support
right hon. Member
len, but I have not
ort from thg Prima
he Prime Minister
at the Russians as
enture of resisting
If that is the Prime
I see great begin-
put, of course, I do
t. I know that this
perfectly well that
;ful and the whole
nut, no disciplinary
m taken whatever.
rely the blundering
Admiralty. [HON.
First Lord ".] WO
First Lord.
oblem ; that is why
licitudes for inter-
order to cover up
;les ever committed
lent,
ark our disapproval
pliant Member for
1 (Lieut.-Colonel
cribed as " this ill-
)y operation," and
! Prime Minister's
nswer any of our
ich, in our opinion
Lye been answered
iblic security at all,
to divide the
- Class 1, Vote 4,
-late Departments,
-ote 12, Admiralty
5.
sum not exceeding
said Service
ided: Ayes 229,
[9.56 p.m.
- Hon. A. G.
0. (Leicester, S.W.)
. Elizabeth
IF.
A. D. D.
n. George (Bolster) ?
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP801301676R000900070003-5
1789
The Cafe of
&own, Thomas (Ince)
Iola, W. A.
sutler, Herbert (Hackney, C.)
Buller, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green)
esilaghan, L.. J. ?
Wile, Mrs. B. A.
Champion, A. J,
Ce heh a tp.myannd,, WG RD:
Male, J.
(ffirkentsead)
eC 9111
Collins, V. J.(Shorediteh & Finsbury)
wad, Mrs. Freda
Cove, W. G.
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)
Cronin, J. ID?
Grossman, R. H. S.
Baines, P.
Dation, At Hon. H.
Darling, George (Hillsborough)
Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.)
D2Vitf, Harold (Leek)
Davies, Stephen (Merthyr)
Deer, G.
Freitas, Geoffrey
Dslargy, H, J.
Dodds, N. N.
Donnely, D. I..
ougdate, Rt. Hn. John (W. OrMav4h)
Ede, At. Hon. J. C.
Edelman, M.
Edwards, Rt. Hon. John (Brighouse)
Edwards, At. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly)
Edwards, Robert (BIlston)
Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.)
Evans, Edward (Lowestoft)
Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury)
Fernyhough, E.
Finoh, H. J.
Fletcher, Eric
Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton)
Caltskell, At. Hon. H. T. N.
Gibson, C. W.
Gordon Walker, Rt. Hon. P. C.
Greenwood, Anthony
Grentell, Rt. Hon. D. R,
Grey, C. F.
Crifliths, David (Rother Valley)
Griffiths, At. Hon. James (Llanelly)
Griffiths, William (Exchange)
lisle, Leslie
Hall, Rt. Hn. Clenvil (Colne 'Watley)
Hamilton, W. W.
Hannan, W.
Rulings, S.
Hayman, F. H.
Healey, Denis
Henderson, At. Hn. A. (Rwly Regis)
Herbison, Miss M.
Hobson, C. R.
Houghton, Douglas
Howell, Charles (Perry Barr)
Howell, Denis (Ali Saints)
Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)
Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)
Hunter, A. E.
Hynd, H, (Accrington)
Agnew, Cmdr, P. G.
Aitken, W. T.
Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.)
Alpert, C. J. M.
Amery, Julian (Preston, N.)
Amory, At. Hn. Heathcoat (Tiverton)
Anstruther-Gray, MaJor'W. J. ?
Arbuthnot, John
Armstrong, C. W.
Ashton, H. ??, ?
Astor, Hon. J. J.
Atkins, H. E.
Saldock, LL.Cmdr, J. M.
33 D 37
?
14 MAY 1956
Irving, S. (Dartford)
Isaacs, At. Hon. G. A.
Janner, B.
Jay, Rt. Hon. D. P. T.
Jager, George (Goole)
Jeger, Mrs. Lena(Holbn &
Jenkins, Roy (Stechford)
Johnson, James (Rugby)
Jones, Rt.Hon. A, Creech (Wakefield)
Jones, David (The HertlepoOts)
Veneer Elfirlert (Wr i(afft, 4.) ? ?
Jones, Jack (Rotherham)
Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham)
Jones, T. W. (Merloneth)
Kenyon, C.
Key, Rt. Hon. C. W.
Lawson, G. M.
Ledger, R. J.
Lee, Frederick (Newton)
Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock)
Lever, Harold (Cheetharri)
Lever, Leslie (Ardwick)
Lewis, Arthur
Lindgren, G. S.
Lipton, Lt.-Col. M.
Logan, D. G.
Mahon, Dr. J. Dickson
MacColl, 4. E.
McInnes, J.
McKay, John (Wallsend)
Mel-cavy, Frank
MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling)
Mahon, Simon
Mallatieu, E. L. (Brin)
Maryland, At. Hon. H. A.
Mason, Roy
Mayhew, C. P.
Mellish, R. J.
Messer, Sir F.
MikArdo, lan
Mitchlson, G. R.
Monsiow, W.
Moody, A. S.
Mort, D..L.
Moss, R.
Moyle, A.
Maley, F. W.
Neel, Harold (Bolsover)
Noel-Baker, Francis (Swindon)
Oliver, D. H.
Dram A. E.
Orbach, M.
Oswald, T.
Owen, W. J.
Paget, P. T.
Paling, At. Hon. W. (Dear?. Ifeliey)
Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury)
Palmer, A. M. F.
Pargiter, D. A.
Parker, .1.
Parkin, B. T.
Paton, J.
Plummer, Sir Leslie
Popplewell, E.
Price, J. T. (Westhoughton)
Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.)
Probed, A. R.
Proctor, W. T.
NOES
Baldwin, A. E.
Beloit!, Lord
Banks, Cot. C.
Barber, Anthony
Barlow, Sir John
Barter, John
Baxter, Sir Beverley
Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.)
Bell, Ronald (Bucks, S.)
Bennett, F. M. (Torquay)
Bennett, .0r. Reginald ,
Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth)
Bidgoed, .1. C.
Commander Crab?, 1790
Pryde, D. J.
Pursey, Cmdr. H.
Rankin, John
Redhead, E. C.
Reeves, J.
Reid, William
Robens, At. Hon., A.
Robert;, Albert (Normantan)
Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)
Robinson, Kenneth Litr Peiverilc,N4
Roger;, George (Kensington, H.)
Ross, William
Shawcross, At. Hon. Sir Hartley
Short, E. W.
6hurmer, P. L. E.
Silverman, Julius (Aston)
Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)
Skeffington, A. M.
Slater, Mrs. H. (Stoke, N.)
Slater, 4. (Sedgefield)
Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)
Snow, J. W.
Sorensen, R. W.
Sparks, J. A.
Steele, T.
Stewart, Michael ? (Fulham)
Stokes, Rt. Hon. R. R. (Ipswich)
Stones, W. (Consett)
Strachey, Rt. Hon. J.
Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)
Stress,Dr. Barnett(Stoke-on-Trent,C).
Summerskill, At, Hen. B.
Swingler, S. T.
Sylvester, G. 0.
Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)
Taylor, John (West Lothian)
Thomas, lorwerth (Rhondda, W.)
Thomson, George (Dundee, B.)
Timmons, J.
Tomney, F.
Turner-Samuels, M.
Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn
Viant, S. P.
Warbey, W. N.
Watkins, T. E.
Weitzman, 0.
Wells, Percy (Faversham)
Wells, William (Walsall, N.)
West, D. G.
Wheeldon, W. E.
White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)
White, Henry (Derbyshire, N.E.)
Wigg, George
Wilcock, Group Capt. C. A. H.
Wilkins, W. A.
Willey, Frederick
Williams, David (Heath)
Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Ab'tiliery)
Willis, Eustace (Edinburgh, E.)
Wilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton)
Winterbottom, Richard
Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.
Woof, R. E.
Yates, V. (Ladywood)
Younger, Rt. Hon. K.
Elitism', K.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES
Mr, Simmons and Mr. Holmes.
Biggs-Davison, J. A.
Birch, Rt. Hon. Nigel
Bishop. F. P.
Black, C. W.
Body, a? F.
Iloothby, Sir Robert
Bossom, Sir A. C.
Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hon. J,. A.
Boyle, Sir Edward
Braine, B. R.
?Braithwalte, Sir Albert (Harrow,
Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W.
Brooke, Rt. Hon. HWY
H.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80B01676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
1791 , The Case pi'
Brooman.White, R. C.
Browne, J. Nixon (Craigton)
Bryan, P.
Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T.
&onus, Wing commander E. E. .
Burden, F. F. A.
Butcher, Sir Herbert
Butler, Rt.Hn. R.A.(SaffrOn Walden)
Campbell, Sir David
Carr, Robert
Cary, Sir Robert
Channon, H.
Chiohester-Clark, R.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Sir Winston
Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmth, W.)
Cole, Norman
Conant, Maj. $ir Roger
Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. Albert
- Cordeaux, LL-Col. J. K.
Corfield, Capt. F. V.
Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne)
Crouch, fl. F.
Crowder, Petra (Ruislip?NorthwoOd)
Cunningham, Knox
Currie, G. B. H.
Dance, J. C. G.
Davies,Rt.Hon.Clement(MontgomerY)
D'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry
Deedes, W. F.
Digby, Simon Wingfield
Dodds-Parker, A. D.
Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. MeA.
_Doughty, C. J. A.
Drayson, G. B.
du Cann, E. D. L.
Dugdale, Rt. Hn. Sir T. (Richmond)
Duncan, Capt. J. A. I..
Duthie, W. S.
Eccles, Rt. Hon. Sir David
Eden,RtkIn.SirA.(WartvIck&L'm'tn)
Eden, J. B. (Bournemouth, West)
Emmet, Hon. Mrs. Evelyn
Erroll, F. J.
Farey-Jones, F. W.
Fell, A.
Finlay, Graeme
Fisher, Nigel
Fleetwood-Hesketh, R. P.
Fletcher?Cooke, C.
Fort, R.
Foster, John
Fraser, Hon. Hugh (Stone)
Fraser, Sir lan,(M'embe & Lonsdale)
Freeth, D. K.
Gammans, Sir David
Garner-Evans, E. H.
Ceorge, J. C. (Pollok)
G'inon-Watt, D.
Cover, D.
Godber, J. B.
Gough, C. F. H.
Gower, H. II.
Graham, Sir Fergus
Grant, W. (Woodside)
Grant-Ferris, Wg.Cdr. R. (NintWloh)
Green, A.
Gresham Cooke, IL
Grimston, Hon. John (St. Albans)
Grimston, Sir Robert (Westbury)
Grosvenor, Lt.-Col. R. G.
Curden, Harotd
Hall, John (Wycombe)
Hare, Rt. Hon. J. H.
Harris, Frederic (Croydon,,N.W.)
Harris, Reader (Heston)
Harrison, A. B. G. (Maldon)
Harrison, Gel. 4, H. (Eye)
Harvey, Air Care. A. V. (Maselesid)
Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.)
Harvie-Watt, Sir George
HHaeyr:e.:, John (WalthanntOW,
Head, Rt. Hon. A. H.
Heald, Rt. Hon. Sir Lionel
Henderson, John (Cathcart)
Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W.
33 D 33
14 MAY 1956
Hill, Mn. E. (Wythenshawe)
Hill, John (8. NorfOlk)
Hinehingbrooke, Viscount -
Holland-Martin, C. 4.
Hope, Lord JOhn
Hornsby-Smith, Wee M. P.
Horobin, Sir Ian
Horsbough, Rt. Hon. Dame Florence
Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire)
Howard, Hon. Greying (St. Ives)
Howard, John (Test)
Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.)
Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.)
Hughes Hallett, vice-Admiral J.
Hughes-Young, M. H. C.
Hulbert, Sir Norman
Hurd, A. R.
Hutchison, Sir Ian Clark (E'b'gh,W.)
Hutchison, Sir James (Scotstoun)
Hyde, Montgomery
Hylton-Foster, Sir H. B. H.
lremonger, T. I...
Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)
Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich)
Jennings, J. C. (Burton)
Jennings, Sir Roland (Hallam)
Johnson, Dr. Donald (Carlisle)
Johnson, Edo (Blackley)
Johnson, Howard (Kemptown)
Jones, Rt. Hon. Aubrey (Hall Green)
Joseph, Sir Keith
Joymion-Hicks, Hon. Sir Laneelot
Kaberry, D.
Keegan, D.
Kerby, Capt. H. B.
Kerr, H. W.
Kershaw, J. A.
Kimball, M.
Kirk, P. M.
Lagden, G. W.
Lambert, Hon. G.
Lambton, Visoount
Lancaster, Col. C. G.
Langford-Holt, J. A.
Leather, E, H. C.
Leavey, J. A.
Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. 14.
Legh, Hon. Peter (Petersfleld)
Lennox-Boyd, Rt. Hon. A. T.
Lindsay, Hon. James (Devon, N.)
Lindsay, Martin (Solihull)
Llnstead, Sir H. N.
Llewellyn, D. T.
Lloyd, Rt. Fin. G. (Sutton Goldfield)
Lloyd, Maj. Sir Guy (Renfrew, E.)
Lloyd-George, Maj. Rt. Hon. G.
Longden, Gilbert
Low, Rt. Hon. A. R. W.
Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)
Lucas, P. B. (Brantford & Chiswick)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh
Madden, S. J.
Macdonald, Sir Peter
Mackeson, Brig. Sir Harry
Mackie, J. H. (Galloway)
McLaughlin, Mrs. P.
Maclay, Rt. Hon. John
Maclean, Fitzroy (Lancaster) -
Macleod, Rt. Hn. lain (Enfield, W.)
MacLeod, John (Ross & Cromarty)
Macmillan,Rt.Hn.Herold(Bromley)
Macpherson, Niall (Dumfries)
Madden, Martin
Maltland,Cdr. J. F. W. (Hortioastle)
Maitland, Hon. Patrick (Lanark)
Manningham-Buller, Rt. Hn. Sir n.
Markham, Major Sir Frank
Marietta, A. A. H.
Marpies, A. E.
Marshall, Douglas
Mathew, R.
Maude, Angus
Maudling, Rt. Hon. R.
Maniby, R. L.
Maydon, LL.Comdr, S. L.. C.
Medlloott, Sir Frank
Commander Crabb i792
Milligan, Rt, Hon. W. R.
Melton; A. H. E.
Moore, Sir Thomas
Morrison. John (Salisbury)
Mott-Radclyffe, C. E.
Nabarro, G. D. N.
Nairn, 0. L. S.
Neave, Airey
Nicholls, Hermar'
Nicholson, Godfrey (FarnhanD
Nicolson, N. (B'n'm'th, E. &Cheats)
Meld, Basil (Chester)
Noble, Comdr. A. H. P.
Nutting, Rt. Hon, Anthony
Oakshott, H. D.
Hn. Phelim (Co. Antrim, N.)
Ormsby-Gore, Hoot. W. D.
Orr, Capt. L. P. IL
Orr-EwIng, Charles Ian (Hutt! .n, N.)
Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian (Weston-3 Mare)
Osborne, C.
Page, R. G.
Pannell, N. A. (Kirkdale)
Partridge, E.
Peyton, J. W. W.
Pickthorn, K. W. M.
Plikington, Capt. ft. A.
Pitman, I. J.
Pitt, Miss E. M.
Pott H. P.
Powell, J. Enoch
Price, Henry (Lewisham, WA
Prier-Palmer, Brig. 0. L.
Profumo, J. D.
Raikes, Sir Victor
Ramsden, J. E.
Rawlinson, Peter
Redmayne, M.
Rees-Davies, W. R. -
Remnant, Hon. P.
Renton, D. L. M.
Ridsdale, J. E.
Rippon, A. G. P.
Roberts, Sir Peter (Heetey)
Robertson, Sir David ' ?
Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks)
? Roper, Sir Harold
Renner, Col. Sir Leonard
Russell, R. S.
Sandys, Rt. Hon. D.
Schofield, LL-Col. W.
Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.
Shemin, R. C.
Shepherd, W itliam
Simithners, Peter
J.
PEe.5r. winh(Middlesesititer)ugh, W )
Sm
Smyth, Brig. Sir John (Nlo-woOd)
Soames, Capt. C.
Spearnian, A. C. M.
SM.
sppeeinr, oe,RH.
(AberdeerL W.)
Spens, nt. lin. Sir P. (Ker-egen,
Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard
Stevens, Geoffrey
Steward, Harold (Stock0,, S.)
Steward, Sir William (Wo-twich, K.i
? Stewart, Henderson (Fill, E.)
Stoddart-Soott, Col. M.:
Stuart, ID. Hon. James kfleray)
StudhOlme, H. G.
Summers, G. S. (Ayleshu-r)
Sumner, W. D. M. (Orn,ton)
Taylor, Sir Charles (Ea'in,eu(ne)
Taylor, William (Bradt* I, N.)
Teeling, W.
Thomas, Leine (Cante1i.,1)
- Thompson, Kenneth (W: non)
iiTtsiroposoln,t1,111..t.-Ctd r.R.(.3
", men
Thornton-Kemsley, C.
They, A. (Bradford, W
Titney, John ( W avertrt,
Turner, H. F. L.
Turton, Rt. Hon. n. H.
Tweedsmuir, Lady
Vane, W. M. F.
------Appr.evett-Fen-ReS/U2727-: CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
4793 Pen,1
Vaughan-Morgo
Vickers, Min J
Vosper, D. F.
Wakefield, Edu
Walker-Smith,
Wall, Major Pi
Ward, Hon. Ge
Original
It being t
being take,
CHAIRMAN
gress and
Committ(
again Tom(
PENSI4
Lords A
Clause
SPECIE
Lords A
14, leave ot
Mr. Di
MacAndrei
privileged,
Entry be n
10.8 p.m.
The F
Treasury (
move, Tha
the Lords
This an
36, to leas
line 37, wt
with a stm
received a
It concern.
child, whi.
with pcnsi
and wome
under 60.
House, a (
to be reee
struction :
these con(
lied at all
the age ol
There n
school at
16 to 18 ;
years' trai
In the fo
House, th
establish
during tt
between 1
pmander Crabb 1192
an, Rt. Hon. W. R.
n, A. H. E.
Sir Thomas
son, John (Salisbury)
RatIclyffe, C? E.
-ro, G. 0 N. '
, D. L. S.
Airey
Harmar
'Icon, Godfrey (Farnham)
Ii,twiriiihE, 4 Fen)
, Basil (Chester)
t, Comdr. A. H. P.
ng, Rt. Hon, Anthony
eott, H. D.
iII, sin. phelim (Co. Antrim, N.)
by-Gore, Hon. W. D.
Capt. L. P. S.
twing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)
Zwing, Sir Ian (Waston-S-Mare)
me, C.
, R. G.
all, N. A. (Kirkdale)
-Idge, E.
DO, J. W. W.
thorn, K. W. M.
ngton, Capt. R. A.
an, I. J.
Miss E. M.
, H. P.
elf, J. Enoch
1, Henry (Lewisham, W.)
r-Palmer, Brig. O. L.
umo, J. D?
;es, Sir Victor
isden, J. E.
linson, Peter
maple, M.
s-Davies, W. R.
inant, Hon. P.
ton, D. L. M.
:dale, J. E.
ion, A. G. F.
erts, Sir Peter (Healey)
ertson, Sir David
Xers, John (Sevenoaks)
atr, Sir Harold
neer, Col. Sir Leonard
sell, R. S.
iys, Rt. Hon. D.
Dfield, Lt.-Col. W.
t-Miller, Cmdr. R.
-roles, R. C.
reherd,William
^ , J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)
[hers, Peter (Winchester)
th, Brig. Sir John (NorwOOd)
-nes, Capt. C.
arman, A. G. M.
r, R. M.
-ice, H. R. (Aberdeen, W.)
ms, Rt. Hn. sir P. (Kons'gt'n, S.)
Capt. Hon. Illohard
?ens, Geoffrey
ward, Harold (Stockport, 8.)
-iard, Sir William (Woolwieh, W.)
wart, Henderson (Fife, E.)
Idart?Scott, Col. M.
art, Rt. Hon. James (Moray) '
4holme, H. G.
orners, G. S. (Aylesbury)
miler, W. D. M. (Orpington)
lor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)
lor, William (Bradford, N.)
ling, W.
mas, Leslie (Canterbury)
ropson, Kenneth (Walton)
?mpson, LL?Cdr.R.(Croydon,
rneycroft, Rt. Hon. P.
rnton?Kemsley, C. N.
y, A. (Bradford, W.)
ey, John (Wavertree)
ner, H. F. L.
non, Rt. Hon. R. H.
medsmuir, Lady
e, W. M.
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP.801301676R000900070003-5
s
/793 Penstons (increase) Bill?
yaughan.moreaii, J. K.
Vickers, Miss J. H. ?
vesper, D. F.
Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
Walker-Smith, D. C.
Wall, Major Patriots
Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
14 MAY 1956
Ward, Dame Irene (Tynemeuth)
Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C.
WatkInson, Rt. Hon. Harold
Webbe, Sir H.
Whitelaw, W.S.I.(Penrith & Berder)
Willtaink, Pita (Sunderland, It.)
Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)
Original Question again proposed.
It being after Ten o'clock and objection
being taken to further Proceedings, The
CHAIRMAN left the Chair to report Pro-
gress and ask leave to sit again.
Committee report Progress; to sit
again Tomorrow.
PENSIONS (INCREASE) BILL
Lords Amendments considered.
Clause 1.--(INCREASE OF PENSIONS
SPECIFIED IN FIRST SCHEDULE.)
Lords Amendments: In page 2, line
14, leave out from" is "to end of line 16.
Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Sir Charles
MacAndrew): All these Amendments are
privileged, and I direct that a Special
Entry be made in the Journals.
10.8 p.m.
The Financial Secretary to the
Treasury (Mr. Henry Brooke): I beg to
move, That this House doth agree with
the Lords in the said Amendment.
This and the next Amendment, in line
36, to leave out from " if " to " the " in
line 37, which is consequential on it, deal
with a small point which I hope will be
received as an improvement to the Bill.
It concerns the definition of a dependent
child, which is important in connection
with pension rights of widows under 40
and women pensioners in their own right
under 60. Under the Bill as it left this
House, a dependent child, if over 16, had
to be receiving full-time education or in-
struction for a trade, and, in addition,
these conditions had to have been satis-
fied at all times since the child reached
the age of 16.
There might be a case where a boy left
school at 16, let us say, and worked from
16 to 18 and then had a period of three
years' training from the age of 18 to 21.
In the form in which the Bill left this
House, the mother would not be able to
establish a claim to a pension increase
during that period when her son was
between 18 and 21.- It would seem to be
33 D 39
Lcii'ds Amendments '1794
Wills, G. (Bridgwater)
Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Wood, Hon. R.
Woollam, John Victor
Yates, William (The Wrekin)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Mr. Heath and Mr. Galbraith.
very bad luck if that were to happen,4,nd
that is why I suggest that this Lt-ds
Amendment is an improvement in 'he
Bill.
The Amendment removes the conii-
tion that the full-time education or train-
ing must have subsisted at all times sir ce
the child became 16. The cost of acct t.
ing this Amendment will be negligible.
There will be Very few cases, but I thi-dc
it will remove a tiny imperfection in the
Bill if the Amendment is agreed to.
Mr. Glenvil Hall (Colne Valley): I
need add very little to what the right hc
Gentleman the Financial Secretary has
said. He was good enough to give r
advance notice of these particul tr
Amendments and their effects. I must
say that I and my hon. Friends have
looked at these Amendments and we
heartily agree with the changes which
have been made in another place. Vv e
accept them without question.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 8.?(POWERS TO INCREASE
OTHER PENSIONS.)
Lords Amendment: In page 8, line 39,
after " areas " to insert "in respect cf
certain service".
Mr. H. Brooke: I beg to move, That
this House doth agree with the Lords in
the said Amendment.
This, and the next two Amendments.
raise a different point, but one on which f
trust the House will be all the more will-
ing to waive Privilege when I mention
that it was brought to the attention before
the Bill left this House. My hon. Frieac.
the Member for Yeovil (Mr. Peyton), it
a speech on Third Reading, drew atten-
tion to the possibility that certain Indian
pensioners might be excluded from the
operation of the Bill rather unfairly.
Clearly, at that stage, it was not possible
to do anything about it here, but I gave
an undertaking that the Government
would examine the position. It was as
a result of that that the Amendments
were agreed to in another place.
- The point at issue is this. Previously,
under the Bill as it left thiS House, it
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5
MEAORANDUM FOR: Mr. Dulles
You asked for this in connection with a
conversation you had with Livie Merchant.
# . r
FORM NO.101 REPLACES FORM 10..101
A AUG 54 WHICH MAY BE USED.
(47)
Approved For Release 2003/02/27 : CIA-RDP80601676R000900070003-5