Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1900-05-15
Spion KOp l(S)atCheS
Subjected to Post Morttm

London, May 1.-The telegraphic cor
respondence relating to the Spion Kop
dispatches, was issued to Parliament
just before midnight on Thursday.
Lord Lan5downe, Secretary of State
for War, wired on March 2Sth, asking
the advice of Lord Roberts about pub
fishing the dispatches, saying: I'VE
cannot publish all the documents en-
closed with your dispatches of Febru-
AIRY 18th and suggesting certain des-
patches, which, in Lord Lansdowne's
opinion, might be published. Lord
Lansdowne added: But | would not
feel justified in editing the papers I'M
less you concur, and you may perhaps
think 1t well to refer to Butler sug-
gest as an alternative that we should
treat your despatch of February 18th,
and all its enclosures as confidential,
and that Butler should send through
you full narritive of the operations
This you could forward to me, with
any observations you desired to make
for publication"
Lord Roberts replied to Lord Lans-
downe, in despatch dated Bloemfon-
tein, March 31st that he had suggest
ed to Sir Redvers Butler to prepare a
full narrative, but that Sir Redvers
Butler had answered as follows: 81
do not at all like the idea of rewriting
a despatch for publication. much
prefer to leave it in the hands of the
COMMENCEMENT Let him select
for publication whatever 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 1t
might. perhaps, be better to over-rule
General Buffers objection, and to
adopt the alternative course suggested
by Lord Lansdowne. He asked Lord
Lansdowne to wire reply.
This reply from Lord Lansdowne
dated April I'd. said:
an view of Buffers objection.
abandon the proposal that the des-
patch should be rewritten, and ! pro-
pose to publish the selection described
in my despatch of March 2Sth."
Lord Roberts answered under date
of April 9Th 81 agree to my despatch
of February 18th being published.
The correspondence also contains
two dispatches referred to in Lord
Lansdowne's despatch of March 2Sth
The first is from Lord Lansdowne to
General Butler dated January 5th, rep
resenting the impossibility of publish
ing his dispatches, which contain
views of the situation and forecasts o.
his Intentions" and emphasizing the
ACCESSIBILITY of sending dispatches de-
scriptive of the operations for presen-
tation to Parliament.
The second is from Lord Wolseley to
Lord Roberts, dated February 9th, and
saying: You will, fell sure, agree
with me that Methuen's despatch, re-
garding Magersfontein, could not be
published as sent. There are passages
in it inappropriate to such documents,
and 1t also gives information Of i'm
portance to the army. If he likes /
will revise the despatch, but I prefer
not to undertake this responsibility. |
suggest that You should ask him to
cancel this despatch, and to write an
other"
The correspondence does not indicate
whether Lord Methuen re-wrote the
despatch as suggested.
The Spion Kop dispatches as pub
lished were exactly the selections sug-
gested in Lord Lansdownes despatch
Of March 2Sth.