Everyone was mystified about what had happened to Affray – and why it had happened. Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, James Callaghan, on a visit to East Woolwich, told reporters:
I can say that every device known to modern science for finding something on the bed of the sea has been used this week. No more could have been done. This is one of the great unfathomable mysteries of the present time. I have spoken to senior naval officers of very great experience and not one has formed a coherent theory about it. We can only speculate.
The Admiralty asked Captain Shelford to speculate on the possibilities in a confidential paper circulated to naval top brass. Assuming that the submarine had dived – as she had indicated in her final message to the shore – Shelford said that she could have lost her trim almost immediately and sunk to the bottom. ‘In view of the nature of the bottom, sand and shingle, gravel and stones, it is most unlikely that the submarine would have stuck on the bottom. Nor is it likely that the contact with the bottom would have been so hard as to penetrate the hull,’ he wrote.
Another of Shelford’s theories speculated that if the submarine was already underwater – perhaps snorting at periscope depth – she might have been rammed by another vessel passing overhead. ‘In the absence of any report from a ship of ramming, the accident must have been caused by some sort of mishap. It is unlikely to have been caused by hitting a wreck when submerged,’ wrote Captain Shelford. He added:
Had she been sunk early in the night, it is possible that some personnel may have escaped and have been taken some distance away by tides before the search was started.
The fact that no marker buoy or smoke candles have been released from the submarine, nor any trace of diesel oil found would indicate that the submarine was completely flooded. A further indication that the submarine is flooded is that no personnel attempted to escape after the 12-charge signal had been dropped. Against this, however, are the signals and the tapping on the hull which are said to have been heard.
Shelford referred to the oil slick reported by the SS Andalusian and investigated by USS Perry. ‘Although this was found to be furnace oil, it may, however, have escaped from a merchant ship after a collision of which she is not aware. The oil tank being holed below the water line and oil escaping until it had been compensated by sea water.’
The possibility ‘that some mishap occurred when the submarine was practising embarking her folboat through the fore-hatch and that the submarine dived suddenly causing the submarine to flood through the conning tower and the fore hatches’ was also considered.
Shelford assumed that Affray sank ‘within 10 miles of a line joining her diving position and her estimated 10.11 position. It will be necessary to search this area and examine all bottom contacts . . . The submarine may have to be salvaged to discover the cause of the accident. Such a search may take several weeks.’
Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, James Callaghan, told Parliament that ‘hopes that any lives will now be saved are dwindling. The search is continuing.’ In his hands he held answers to questions he anticipated fellow MPs might ask him. There were none. If he had been asked questions, however, his notes tell us exactly what he would have said in reply. On the subject of how many men were on board Affray, he would have told the House:
The normal peacetime complement on ‘A’ class submarines is five officers and fifty-eight ratings. This would be increased slightly in war and there are minor variations in peacetime in different vessels according to the equipment carried. It would be true to say, therefore, that Affray has at present ten more men on board than she would normally carry and there may be supplementaries to this. This additional number should make no difference to the possibilities of escape. There is sufficient escape apparatus for everyone on board.
If asked about marker buoys on board the submarine, Callaghan’s notes would have prompted him to declare:
Marker buoys are fitted at each end of the submarine and can be released from inside. No marker buoy has, so far, been found and no smoke candles, which can also be released, have been seen, neither are there any oil slicks in the position in which the submarine is believed to be.
On hull tappings:
Hull tappings were reported . . . but it cannot be certain that these came from the submarine.
On the question of sabotage, one of Callaghan’s aides had written:
Should this be raised the answer is presumably that there is no evidence at present – rather than any answer which would rule out this possibility. A submarine containing twenty officers of the Submarine course would be a worthwhile target.
That morning, the Daily Express reported:
The planes were recalled last night and the little ships came back – there was no reasonable hope of rescuing survivors from the submarine Affray. A wind rose over the dull Channel and the sea had won again. Sixty-six hours after the Affray had dived with seventy-five souls on board an ASDIC contact was reported. A diver was going down. But the diver did not go. The reported contact was not confirmed. The sea was too rough. A gale blew in the Channel. When it drops, the search goes on – for the submarine and her secrets, but with no hope for the lives.
And so the search continued using fewer ships and with the deep diving and submarine rescue ship Reclaim at the centre of operations.
Gale force winds and high seas interrupted operations on 21 and 22 April. Small craft working in the search area were ordered to take shelter while other ships remained at anchor, unable to perform any useful task in such conditions. Diving resumed at early evening on 23 April when a diver attempted to investigate a contact made by HMS Helmsdale. The strength of the tide and depth of the water did not allow the diver to spend much time on the bottom to confirm without any doubt the exact nature of the wreck. While mooring above the wreck, Reclaim lost an anchor and damaged her mooring wires. The spring tides were considered too strong for further diving and the salvage group was ordered to return to harbour on 24 April to re-equip and await more favourable tides.
From The Times, 21 April, 1951:
The opening of a fund on behalf of the relatives of the men who lost their lives in the submarine Affray, by which it is hoped to raise at least £100,000, is announced by Albert Johnson, Lord Mayor of Portsmouth and Mr Charles Osborn, Mayor of Gosport. In a joint appeal issued yesterday, they state:
‘The nation as a whole will join with us in offering their profound sympathy to the relatives of those who lost their lives on the tragic disaster to HM Submarine Affray. It will be generally known that Affray was based at HMS Dolphin, the submarine depot at Gosport and manned with a crew from three naval ports – Portsmouth, Plymouth and Chatham.
‘We feel sure that the whole country will wish to assist us in the efforts we are now making to alleviate the distress and sorrow which this terrible accident has inflicted on so many of the young wives and children of the gallant crew. No words can describe the anguished thoughts during these last few days of those whose dear ones are now lost to them, nor can we measure in terms of money or any other help we can give the magnitude of their loss.
‘We are inaugurating a fund in an endeavour to ease the financial stress which must inevitably follow as a consequence of their bereavement. We have set as our target the sum of £100,000 which would, in a small measure, help to bridge the gap in the income of those widows and orphans who are left to sorrow.’
April 21, 1951 – From Commander-in-Chief, Portsmouth to the Admiralty:
The Lord Mayor of Portsmouth and Mayor of Gosport have decided to launch a joint appeal in aid of the dependants of officers and men lost in HMS Affray.
It is felt that the Navy will wish to subscribe generously to this appeal and it is suggested that all commanding officers be invited to collect subscriptions from their commands and to remit them to the Supply Officer, HMS Dolphin, or direct to the Lord Mayor of Portsmouth or Mayor of Gosport.
Trustees of the Portsmouth Naval Disasters Fund contributed £6,000 towards the fund and despite rationing, food restrictions and the post-war shortage of just about everything, the British public also dug deep into their pockets, wallets, handbags and piggy banks to donate. The day after the fund was announced, the postman delivered bundles of letters to the Lord Mayor of Portsmouth’s parlour containing contributions from sympathisers all over Britain. The Mayor was inundated with telephone calls from societies and individuals wanting to contribute to the fund.
Early donations were received from the Prime Minister’s office, the Cammell Laird yard where Affray had been built five years earlier and the Trades Union Congress. Popular entertainers Bud Flanagan and the Crazy Gang, Chesney Allan, Arthur Askey, Tommy Trinder, Jack Warner and Elsie and Doris Waters teamed up with the stars of Morning Departure John Mills and Richard Attenborough to stage a Sunday night benefit performance at London’s Victoria Palace Theatre. Stars of stage and screen, including Margaret Lockwood, Kay Kendall, Phyllis Calvert, and Susan Shaw volunteered their services as programme sellers. The sell-out evening raised hundreds of pounds for the fund.
Divers on board Reclaim donated the danger money they were paid while searching for Affray to the fund. A total of £40 from the ship’s company was handed over to the Lord Mayor of Portsmouth.
Across the country dances – everything from ballroom to bebop – whist drives, charity football matches, sponsored silences, choral singing, drama productions, coffee mornings and poetry recitals were held with proceeds sent directly to the fund. Mums, dads and children living in the Portsmouth and Gosport districts got to work on a range of fund-raising activities. Children from Kilmiston School, Fratten, danced and sang for two hours watched by 100 people and raised £2 5s. The Sunday League second division club Red Lion played a charity football match with HMS Implacable and a £25 cheque from Implacable was sent along with the £16 17s 6d match proceeds. A performance of The Middle Watch by the West Amateur Dramatic Society raised £56 12s 9d, while Portsmouth Spiritualist Medium Fellowship donated £7 to the cause.
Other donations were received from Mother Shipton Men’s Darts Club (£5), a Junior Spotlight concert (£15), a Pompey Revellers Concert organised by the West Portsmouth Conservative Association Club (£13 18s) and the Order of Woodcraft Chivalry, Porchester (£12 0s 1d). The Football Association donated the ball used during the Blackpool v Newcastle championship match, complete with autographs of the players. It was later auctioned with the proceeds donated to the fund.
Before long, Fund Chairman, Albert Johnson was telling the press: ‘So generous has been the nationwide response to our appeal that we are now in the happy position of being able to announce that our original target of £100,000 has been exceeded.’
The Portsmouth Evening News paid a visit to the Lord Mayor’s Parlour to see how the fund was being handled. It reported:
Among the thousands of letters which have poured into the council’s offices is a poignant little note from a woman who thirty-four years ago waited for news of her sailor sweetheart. Eventually it came. She has written to the Lord Mayor, ‘May I offer this enclosed mite in memory of my fiancé whose submarine was lost in January 1917.’
Here was another from a little Somerset village which simply said, ‘As one who is receiving a pension from a similar disaster fund, I know well what a difference such financial help makes to the widows and children.’ Wolf Cubs, Scouts, schoolchildren, ambulance brigades, ex-Wrens, office girls are among those who have made collective efforts. The fund also brought residents of various streets in Portsmouth and Gosport together and their collections have raised good sums of money which have been donated.
The BBC declined to broadcast an appeal over the airwaves, stating that ‘where charitable institutions already exist, we do not normally arrange for appeals’. It was explained that various naval and seaman’s charities existed for such disasters and the disaster fund ought to be talking to them. BBC radio’s main rival for teenage listeners, Radio Luxembourg, however, came to the rescue and an appeal by the popular actor, Wilfred Pickles, generated hundreds more pounds for the fund.
By July more than £150,000 had been raised and cash, cheques, postal orders and foreign currency dominations were still coming in daily. Sixty-two dependants registered to receive payments from the fund – thirty-three widows and children and twenty-nine parents of lost Affray seamen. The families of ten officers and three ratings declined payment of any kind.
The first payments were made to dependants on July 24 ‘to help meet their immediate needs’. Widows each received an initial grant of £200 plus £50 for each child (there were thirty-six in April 1951) or unborn child (three widows were pregnant at the time of the disaster). Other dependants – mostly parents – also received £50. Later each dependant received a monthly sum, the amount determined by the rank of their late husband or son in the submarine service and number of children under the age of 21 living at home. The widow of an able seaman with two children, for example, would receive a monthly sum of £27 19s 2d. The widow of an officer would receive 10 per cent more. Naval pensions would be paid on top of these sums.
The fund was officially closed in November 1951 with £176,673 3s 11d in the bank. It allowed appointed trustees to administer the fund to buy homes already lived in by widows or allow them to move to other accommodation. Money was available to pay for new furnishings, cover removal costs, legal fees, home insurance and rates. Fees were also available for children of Affray’s crew to attend private schools if their mothers decided this was best for their sons or daughters. The fund provided money for school uniforms, educational materials and trips. Fees for children later going on to higher education at university were also covered.
Bonus payments were made to dependants at Christmas: £20–£25 for adult dependants and £10 for children. In later years Christmas payments were increased to £50 in 1960, £70 in 1970 and by December 1999 widows still eligible for payments received £100.
A booklet issued to each dependant stated: ‘The allowance to a female dependant (whether widow, mother, sister, child or other dependant of one of those lost) shall cease on her remarriage or cohabitation.’ Payment to children stopped when they reached the age of 18.
After initial payment had been made to dependant families, the trustees elected to invest some of the money in institutional stocks and shares guaranteed to provide healthy and regular returns. Shares were purchased in Unilever, Imperial Tobacco, ICI, the Manchester Ship Canal, Distillers and the brewing company Courage-Barclay-Simonds. Equity was also purchased in British Electricity, British Gas, British Transport and corporation and county stocks. Ten years after the Affray disaster, the fund’s investments totalled £121,963 9s 2d which generated an annual income of £5,045 12s 7d.
Affray’s widows, children and parents had to pay a price for their financial aid and account for every penny spent from their income from the fund. Each year they received an official visit from a fund representative who questioned them closely about their financial circumstances. Some – but not all – of the dependants dreaded the annual visits fearing giving wrong answers to pages of questions about their annual expenditure; everything from shopping and utility bills to the cost of wallpaper and paint, petrol and public transport. Every item had to be accounted for and if it appeared that additional income might be coming into a household from another source, money received from the fund was reduced accordingly. Children had to be present at the meetings, wearing school uniform and clutching a copy of their latest school report. If visits took place in term time while children in boarding schools were not present at home, fund officials travelled to the schools to interview children and their teachers. There was no doubt, however, that all dependants were grateful to the fund and the people from across the country – and the world – contributing to it.
Following these visits, fund officials wrote detailed reports about their findings for circulation to the trustees. Their comments were often cruel. After visiting one widow, the visitor recorded that ‘the house was very untidy, smelly with washing strewn all over the furniture’. At another home she observed that a child’s ‘school report clearly shows that he is a real plodder who will probably go nowhere in life’. Another widow was challenged as to how she could afford a seaside holiday with her children ‘and was unable to tell me how she could afford the trip’.
Not every Affray widow found the official visits a trial. Lieutenant Foster’s widow, Mary, always found her representative, Miss Gilmore, ‘a charming and sympathetic lady and when she retired, a Miss Rhodes equally so’.
Members of the disaster fund committee met annually, under the chairmanship of the Lord Mayor of Portsmouth, and produced a press statement for circulation to local papers. In November 1963, twelve years after the disaster, the media was told:
The Annual General Meeting of the HM Submarine Affray Disaster Relief Fund was held at Guildhall, Portsmouth, on Tuesday 26 November 1963, under the Chairmanship of the Lord Mayor of Portsmouth (Councillor H. Sotnick, JP).
Payment of regular allowances to widows, children and other dependants were approved and in a number of cases additional grants were awarded. The cost of supplementing the education of the child dependants continues to be a major call on the fund. As usual, each dependant child will receive a Christmas gift.
Fourteen widows and thirty-five dependant children will benefit by the receipt of these allowances. The children of mothers who have remarried continue to receive allowances from the fund.
The Committee learned with pleasure that a number of the dependant children, with whose education the Fund has assisted, have achieved considerable success and, in particular, a Naval Scholarship at Dartmouth has been awarded to one of the boys.
Reports were received from the Almoner on other beneficiaries of the Fund who, whilst not falling within the above categories, were at the time of the loss of HM Submarine Affray in receipt of financial assistance from a member of her crew. Again, the reports showed that in a number of these cases, hardship had arisen as a result of diminished income, ill health or infirmity – and in each such case the Committee authorised the payment from the fund of a monetary grant sufficient to relieve individual hardship.
By 1978, remaining funds were invested in new annuities to ensure there would be sufficient money available to pay remaining dependants their allowances. But dependants were put through a means test and told they were ‘no longer entitled to the money, which was paid at the discretion of the trustees’. Widows learned that annuities had been purchased to give them ‘peace of mind’ for the rest of their lives.
In 1982, the late Kathie Johnson, MBE, Alderman of the City of Southampton and widow of the former Lord Mayor of Portsmouth, contacted John Marshall, Leader of Portsmouth City Council, expressing concerns about how the fund was being managed. She reminded Mr Marshall:
When my late husband, Albert Johnson, was Lord Mayor of Portsmouth there occurred a great disaster when the submarine HMS Affray went down and my husband set up an appeal for the widows and dependants . . . The money poured in from the good people of Britain, many, many thousands of pounds – and then along came a law about only being able to distribute sufficient funds for ordinary needs of widows and dependants . . .
I drove my husband to a meeting of the Affray fund committee in Portsmouth in 1969, just before he died, and on the way home I recall how unhappy he was, saying there was still this terrific amount in the fund. He said that seventeen years after the disaster, all the offspring had completed their education and there was only one widow left. There was some discussion about giving her £10 for Christmas. My husband said, ‘Why not give her £1,000? What are we saving it for? It was raised for the likes of this widow.’
I told the present Lord Mayor, Councillor Frank Sorrell, that I thought any funds still in hand should be handed over to something like the British Sailors Society or King George’s Fund for Sailors for the benefit of all sea-faring widows and asked if it were permissible to tell me how much was still in the fund.
I received a reply from the Lord Mayor saying: ‘I do recall the establishment of the Affray Disaster Fund and that your husband was Chairman of that committee for some years. I have only recently attended the 1981 meeting and whilst the beneficiaries have now diminished considerably, there is some money left, which is, of course, administered by the Public Trustee Office. However, in order that you may have the up-to-date situation, I am sending a copy of your letter to the Secretary of the Fund who will give you a current resumé of progress.’ Since then, I have received nothing at all.
And so it goes on. In 2007 the HM Submarine Affray Disaster Relief Fund Trust remains active – although Portsmouth City Council is coy about revealing how much money is still in the bank. All enquiries to the council are referred to the Office of the Official Solicitor at the Public Trustee Office, whose department works at the speed of a snail and then chooses to be economical with information it divulges, even when approached under rules governing the Freedom of Information Act.
When formally approached by this author with a raft of questions, Mrs J. Kearney for the Public Trustees gave little away, stating that just because the Affray fund was established by subscription,
does not in itself mean that it is subject to public scrutiny in all respects. . . . The accounts of the fund are not open to public scrutiny although the investment of the fund is in accordance with the powers/limitations of the trust instrument and the general law relating to trustee investment and in force from time to time. . . . Prima facie the fund comes to an end on the death of the last dependant. If there are any monies remaining in the settlement on the death of the last dependant, the trustees will consider which legal principal must apply to the disposal of these monies in the light of the law and general circumstances obtaining at the time. It is possible that any such monies will be applied for charitable purposes, but this will be determined by the trustees at the appropriate time, possibly in conjunction with the Charity Commission.
This author has learned that nearly sixty years after the fund was established, only three Affray dependants were still alive in 2007 and entitled to a monthly allowance. One of them is Joy Cook, from Ilfracombe, Devon and widow of Leading Seaman George Cook. Mrs Cook, who never remarried and is today an invalid, now receives around £2,000 a year – £166 per month – from the fund. Inflation has clearly failed to keep up with the needs of a disabled widow whose husband was so cruelly snatched away from her after just thee years of marriage more than half a lifetime ago. Her allowance is classed a ‘war pension’ as Affray had been on a war exercise. Her Christmas bonuses stopped a long time ago.
Mrs Cook no longer receives annual visits from trustee representatives. They also stopped long ago. She said:
The last time I had a personal visit from a fund representative, the lady asked me what HMS Affray was. She had no idea what it was all about. She had done no research. It’s obvious that the present fund managers haven’t a clue about its history, where the money had come from or the price paid by our husbands and their families all that time ago.
When the day finally comes when people are no longer drawing money from the fund, I would like to see it put to some good use. It ought not to just sit there; it needs to be used – preferably for submariners and their families.
Lieutenant Foster’s widow, Mary, agrees.
Any money left should, without a doubt, be looked into and distributed to those for whom it was originally intended. Failing that, it should be given to Naval charities for deserving cases. I feel that we treat our service personnel abominably, a national disgrace for which our government, whatever their colour, should be shamed.