Introduction

I want to make it quite clear that this is not the so-called Harper Record, so frequently demanded in the House of Commons. The Official Record of the Battle of Jutland, which I was originally directed, by Admiral-of-the-Fleet Lord Wester Wemyss, to prepare and which was completed in October 1919,1 was simply a plain, straightforward narrative of the sequence of events, together with track charts showing the movements of every ship present on both sides. It was, in fact, “the truth about Jutland”, from start to finish, in the form of an unvarnished statement based solely on documentary evidence and free from comment or criticism. By Lord Wester Wemyss’ direction, all statements made in the Record were to have been in accordance with evidence obtainable from Official documents, and no oral evidence was to be accepted. These instructions were faithfully followed by me, as stated by Lord Wester Wemyss in a letter to the Press published on 16th December 1920.

Had the Record been published, in its original form, it would have been of no great interest to the reader looking for something sensational, but it would have prevented the flood of misconceptions and misrepresentations with which the public has been misled for some seven years past. It would also have prevented the controversy, largely of a personal nature, so virulently waged in the Press.

On the other hand, it is a very good thing that in its ultimate form it never did see the light of day. The whole story of the deletions, alterations and additions – or in Parliamentary language “the necessary revision of the material”² – demanded by those in authority cannot be told in these pages. The vicissitudes which the original Record underwent must, however, be patent to anyone who followed the series of tortuous manoeuvres and official prevarications in Parliament whenever it was asked for. In this connection a somewhat lengthy précis of a very few of the many Answers on the subject, in chronological order, will now be given. Space does not permit of quoting these in full.³ The italics are mine.

1919
19th March	“Steps are already being taken to draw up a narrative showing the actual sequence of events …” The question of publication “will be, considered”.
26th March	“Captain J.E.T. Harper has been attached to the War Staff for the purpose …” Publication “will be considered”.
9th July	It is anticipated that Captain Harper’s investigation will be completed at the “end of September and publication will be considered”.
25th July	“The Official Record is now being compiled …”

A DEFINITE PROMISE

29th October	“No ‘inquiry’ has been held, nor is one in contemplation. A narrative of events has been completed and will be published when printed.”
3rd December	“It is hoped to publish shortly.”

1920
18th February	“The Official narrative of the Battle of Jutland will, I hope, be published shortly …” A report by Admiral Scheer will be published “as an appendix to the Official narrative. This report has been utilized to check the information available from our own records …”
14th April	“Technicalities connected with production make it improbable that publication can take place in much less than 3 months from now.”
23rd June	“Regret date (of publication) cannot be given. Difficulties arising, among other things, from the provision of paper for the charts, are stated to be likely to cause delay …”
4th August	“Fresh evidence has recently come to light which must be considered before the Official Report, which had almost reached completion,4 can be published … shall certainly ensure that he (Lord Jellicoe) will see the final form before publication.”

THE PROMISE IS NOW RESCINDED

27th October.	“It is not now proposed to publish an Official account … any record based on British official evidence only would inevitably present a one-sided version … Moreover, Sir Julian Corbett’s ‘Naval History of the War’ … includes Jutland, is likely to be published in the course of next year, and the publishers have made representations that they would have strong reason to complain of the simultaneous publication by the Admiralty of any such narrative. However, all the material prepared by the Admiralty will be placed at Sir Julian Corbett’s disposal.” “Both gallant Admirals (Jellicoe and Beatty) have seen the report.”
1st November.	The Prime Minister would not promise that the Official Record would be included in the ‘Naval History of the War’ as it stands, without any amendment, alteration, or omissions. His reasons for the Admiralty having gone back on their decisions to publish was, that it was a “highly controversial topic” and possibly not “desirable that there should be a separate account”. He further stated that the publishers had “absolutely no right” to object to the Official publication of a separate Admiralty account.
4th November.	The Prime Minister stated: “In view of the general wish expressed on Monday for the immediate publication of documents relating to the Battle of Jutland, a Parliamentary Paper will be issued at an early date containing all these documents whether reports, despatches or signals.”

This reply was taken to mean that my Official Record would be published, as evidenced by a letter from Viscount Curzon published in The Times on 5th November 1920, in which he said: “I cannot help writing these few lines with reference to the announcement by the Prime Minister that the Official Report of the Battle of Jutland is to be published. … The nonpublication of this Report represented the worst possible results of the policy of Hush … I maintain that the country has a right to know the truth.”

Further evidence as to the accepted meaning of the Prime Minister’s promise is contained in a Question and Answer in the House of Commons on:

15th November

In reply to the question: “When the Official Record of the Battle of Jutland will be published?” it was stated: “It is hoped that publication will be possible within a month.”

Several other questions were asked during November 1920, the replies to which at length made it clear to the House that the promised publication was not the Official Record. This led to the following Answers being given in reply to further demands for that Record:

22nd November	“The reason for not publishing Captain Harper’s summary of events was … that a record based on British Official evidence only would inevitably present a one-sided version.”
1st December	“Captain Harper’s diagrams will not be included.”
8th December	Viscount Curzon pressed for a reconsideration of the decision not to publish the “Harper diagrams”, but he was informed that: “Facts were asked for and the facts at the disposal of the Admiralty … will be published.”

Rear-Admiral Adair then remarked that “the Official despatches will be so much Greek to the general public and to most of the Members of this House, and that it is only such a report as Captain Harper’s that anything intelligible can be made out of them.” He was then told that “that was the attitude the Admiralty took up in the first instance, but the demand of the House for immediate publication of the Official documents was granted by the Prime Minister … The Admiralty was rather turned down as to the procedure which they proposed to take.”

The despatches, signals and other documents referring to the battle were, in December 1920, published as a Blue Book (Battle of Jutland, Official Despatches with Appendices, Cmd. 1068). This publication not unnaturally led to several more questions being asked in the House and to objections in the Press, because the issue of this mass of undigested documents only confused public opinion more than ever.

Further requests were made in the House of Commons on 23rd December 1920, 11th April 1923, 27th February 1925 and 14th March 1927, and in the House of Lords on 8th March 1921, for the publication of the Official Record and the charts which accompanied it; but all requests were met with a refusal. On 11th April 1923, in reply to a Question, it was stated that the Record was “only completed some months after he (Lord Wester Wemyss) had left the Board. By the time it was completed further information had become accessible which necessitated revision of the material.”

The nation and the Press have, not unnaturally, sensed a “mystery” about Jutland. Actually there is not, and never has been, any mystery about the details of the battle, but the public has every reason to be suspicious and dissatisfied with the Admiralty’s attitude towards the subject.

The present small work is not intended to be a comprehensive account of the battle. Such an account is to be found in the Official History of the War – Naval Operations – Vol. III. Its author, that gifted and honest historian, the late Sir Julian Corbett, had all the secret and other records, including the Harper Record, at his disposal,⁵ and all the essential facts are truly and comprehensively stated in his account; but, like all Official publications, any comments it contains are explanatory and not critical. It is very curious, however, that even this straightforward account, published under the auspices of the Committee of Imperial Defence, at the public expense, should have been specifically repudiated by the Board of Admiralty in a note on the fly-leaf.

In the chapters which follow I have only attempted to outline the salient features of the Battle of Jutland, and in doing so I have made use of no information which is not available to the public; but it has been my endeavour to show just where, and how, the public has been so badly misled on many important points. For sake of brevity the full titles of the Admirals mentioned are, in most cases, omitted, and they are alluded to, with all respect, by their surnames only.

The Official Record, prepared under my supervision, would not have dotted the “Is” and crossed the “Ts” of its narrative as I have been able to do, to a certain extent, herein. My readers may also be able to draw their own conclusions as to the real reasons why that Record was not published.

It only remains to recall that Admiral-of-the-Fleet Lord Wester Wemyss was the First Sea Lord who originally issued the orders for an Official Record of Jutland to be prepared, in a form in which it could be published should such a demand arise. He perused it on its completion and, on 16th December 1920, wrote to the Press as follows: “The report was only finished just before I left the Admiralty … I regret that the Admiralty should withhold from the public a paper which was designed for their information, and which would materially have assisted them in forming an opinion upon a somewhat involved subject.”

Admiral Sir Francis Bridgeman, another one-time First Sea Lord, wrote to The Times on 3rd January 1921 referring to Lord Wester Wemyss’ letter. He said: “Lord Jellicoe has asked no less strongly, and still asks, that it should be published. What is standing in the way? As a former First Sea Lord, may I add my voice to that of Lord Wester Wemyss and Lord Jellicoe, in the interests of the Service.”

We have, therefore, three ex-First Sea Lords, two of whom, Lord Wester Wemyss and Lord Jellicoe, had seen the Record, and all of whom desired the publication of all the facts connected with the battle. On 1st November 1919 Lord Wester Wemyss left the Board of Admiralty, and the position of First Sea Lord has, since that date, been held by Lord Beatty.