The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-05-04
THE sPIoN KOP DISPATCHES.



LONDON, Nay s.-The telegraphic corre-
spondence relating to the Spion kop dis
patches was issued to Parliament just be-
fore midnight on Thursday. Lord Lans-
downe, secretary of state for war, wired
March 2S asking the advice OF Lord Rob-
erts about publishing the dispatches, say
ing: 1--WE cannot publish all the documents
inclosed with your dispatch Of Feb. 49,"
and suggesting certain dispatches which,
in Lord Lansdownes opinion, might be
published. Lord Lansdowne added: "But 1
would not feel justified in thus editing the
papers unless you concur. and you may
perhaps think 1t well to refer to Butler. 1
suggest, as an alternative, that we should
treat your dispatch of Feb. 13. and all it's
Enclosures, as confidential, and that Butler
should send through you a full narrative
of the operations. This you could forward
to me with any observations you desired
to make for publication
Lord Roberts replied to Lord Lansdowne
in dispatch dated Bloemfontein, March
81, that he had suggested to Sir Redvers
Butler to prepare full narrative, but that
Sir Redvers had answered as follows: ST do
not at all like the idea of rewriting dis
patch for publication. 1 much prefer to
leave 1t in the hands of the comma nder-i
chief. Let him select for publication what
ever he thinks proper"
To this Lord Roberts appended that he
would not himself object to the publication
of a paper edited as Lord Lansdowne had
suggested. but that it might perhaps be
better to overrule General Buffers objec-
f0xz ,x@Ia al h. oIt
gested by Lord Lansdowne He asked
Lord Lansdowne to wire reply. This re-
ply from Lord Lansdowne, dated April 2,
said: In view of Buffers objection aban-
don the proposal that the dispatch should
be rewritten and propose to publish the
selection described In my dispatch of
March 2S"
Lord Roberts answered under date of
April s: "I agree to my dispatch of Feb. 13
being published"
The correspondence also contains two
dispatches referred to in Lord Lansdowne's s
dispatch of March %. The first is from
Lord Lansdowne to General Butler. dated
Jan. 5. representing the impossibility of
publishing his dispatches. which contain
views of the situation and forecasts of his
ity of sending dispatches descriptive of the
operations for presentation TO Parliament.
The second is from Lord wolseley TO Lord
Roberts. dated Feb. 6. and saying "you
will. feel sure. agree with me that Me-
thuen's dispatch regarding Magersfontein
could not be published as sent. There are
passages in 1t inappropriate TO such docu-
ments. and IL also gives information of i'm
rortance to the enemy. If he likes 1 will
revise the dispatch. but prefer not TO un-
dertake this responsibility. suggest that
you should ask him TO cancel this dispatch
and to write another"
The correspondence does not indicate
whether Lord Methuen rewrote the dis
Patch as suggested.
The Spion kop dispatches. as published,
were exactly the selection suggested in
Lord Lansdowne's dispatch OF March 2s
The Times. referring TO the correspond
ence. says: Lord Lansdowne's dispatch is
singular invitation TO Lord Roberts 10
cook his opinions for the benefit of the un-
fortunate British public. Comment upon
CONTINUED on SECOND PAGEJ