THE MARCONI AGREEMENT.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "'SPECrsTOR.1
SIR,—The Postmaster-General wishes to call your attention to the answer, a copy of which is enclosed, which he has giVen to a question asked by Sir Ryland Adkins in the House of Commons this afternoon.—I am, Sir, &c.,
(Private Secretary).
General Post Office, London. Novembelir 13- 1,S1712.°"
[corr.] Sir Ryland Adkins,—To ask the Postmaster-General whether the first Marconi tender was signed in January last; whether none of the dominions have-entered into a contract with the Marconi Company ; and whether he has himself given currency to either or both of these statements.
The Postmaster-General's Answer to Sir Ryland .Adkins' Question for Thursday, November 21st, 1812.
These statements which have appeared in the-National Review and have been reproduced textually in the Spectator, are totally
false, like much else that has been written with reference to this contract.. No agreement of any kind was made with the Marconi Company with respect to these stations until March 7th, 1912, when their tender, in general terms, was accepted, the contract itself being signed on the 19th of July. I have made no reference to any tender having been signed in January. The South African Government is participating in the contract, and the statement which I am alleged to have made with respect to the Dominions is a mere invention."
We of course accept Mr. Samuel's statement, and express our regret that we should have quoted the incorrect statements made by Mr. Lawson. We reproduced those statements in good faith and on the authority of Mr. Lawson. As to Mr. Samuel's guarded innuendo, we desire to ask him whether he means to suggest falsehood in the Spectator P If he does, let him put his accusation plainly and repeat it where it is not privileged. In that case we will at once begin proceedings for libel against him. In this way Mr. Samuel
will be able to discover whether he has a right to charge us with falsity. We will gladly set him the example of which we speak to-day in our notes. We-must add here a protest against
the habit of Members of Parliament of making defamatory statements in regard to newspapers under cover of Parlia- mentary privilege. We may repeat here that we have never accused Mr. Samuel or any of his colleagues in the Cabinet of any corrupt intent in regard to the Marconi contract, for the good and sufficient reason that we do not believe him or any of them to have had any such intent. We have, however, expressed great regret that a most unfortunate atmosphere of suspicion has been created—unfairly no doubt—in the public mind ; and further we have urged that Mr. Samuel and Sir Rufus Isaacs should bring actions for libel against their traducers. Men holding offices of great public trust have on them an imperative duty to take action when they are publicly accused. This failure- to prosecute is not in the least made good by suggestions of falsehood conveyed under the protection of Parliamentary privilege.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
