Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Press. TUESDAY, JULY 9, 1901. THE WEAKNESS OF THE NAVY.

The discussion which has taken place in the House of Commons regarding the Navy Wilt do good—it has done good already in so far as it has elicited Ministerial assurances that England's first arm of defence shall be strengthened in certain rejects in which a dangerous condition of weakness was apparent, The South African war tested acdi probed our army organisation, and in several important respects proved it to be.rotten. Fortunately, with our English facility for making the worst of a bad job, we managed to get things fairly right without actually meeting with a national disaster, bu* it was as much owing to good luck as anything else that w« did not suffer something very much like irretrievable disgrace. We. do nat want to go throughHlie same imminent peril at the outset of a naval war, should it ever be our misfortune to be involved in one. Un-

preparedness or mismanagement in regard to the Navy means that we put in serious jeopardy oar comniandi of the sea, and upon the command of the sea depends our very existence as an Empire. Therefore, this is emphatically a oase in which we cannot afford to trust to luck. As far as is humanly possible we must keep our fleet up to a strength tihat wilf render it invincible against any other two European Powers combined , , and we must not be content with official assurances, but satisfy ourselves that this requirement,, so essential to our national safety, has been met.

That the Government needed to be brought up to the mark id this respect is evident both from the debate and what has gone before. Being called upon to increase the efficiency of the Army, there has been a tendency on their part to do so at the expense of the Navy. A case in point is the proposal -that the garrison defence of the coaling stations should be" given to the Admiralty, who were to provide marines for the purpose. Seeing that it seems impossible for the Navy to keep up an adequate supply of men for its present requirements, it is manifest that it would be considerably weakened if it had. to provide drafts of marines for the defence of the coaling stations. Apart from this, Mr H. W. "Wilson, the well-known author of "Ironclads in Action," showed conclusively in a recent article in the "Contemporary Review" that the English. Navy is being allowed to lag behind the times. To begin with, the organisation is on a wrong basis—that of the negation of the dk-ecfc responsibility. There is a political First Lord of the .Admiralty in the Cabinet who generally has no technical knowledge of naval matters, and he is aided by four naval officers (one of them termed the First Sea-Lord), a civil Lord, and a financial secretary. Whether the First Lord! is the equal or the -superior of the First Sea-Lord, ondi what is exactly the position of power enjoyed' by the other members of the Board no one seems to know. There are four great British fiesta maintained in time of peace—the Channel, Reserve, and Mediterranean in European waters, and the China fleet in the Far East. Air Wilson declares that cot one of these four last autumn was properly composed or prepared for war. In the reoent debate particular stress was laid upon the inadequacy o f the Mediterranean, fleet, and this seems to have been tacitly admitted, even by iihe Government. Some three months ago. when Mr Wilson wrote, it contained ten battleships, *hre© old ironclads, seven protected craissrs, fifteen destroyers, end several torpedo boats, some of which were jo old as to ba practically valueless. "The "fiwW" **/* )fr Wflsofit "iM ia * politic*

"of great responsibility and dange*.' At' " Toulon ara the -headquarters of the French v Navy in the Mediterranean, which can at " any time put six perfectly modern battte- " phips, three older ones, ten cruisers, and a "host of torpedo craft to sea. Besides this "the Russian fleets, have to be watched. "In the Mediterranean Btuna has one "battleship, in tie Black Sea *aven, and "these may always attempt to combine " witn tie French, or try a stroke against "Egypt and tfce Sues Canal. It" is a nice "problem how, with ten modern battle- " ships, at once to close the Straits of Gibraltar, and to watch fourteen hostile " battleships when these battleships are dis- " tributed as are the French and Russian." The problem is, of course, insoluble, and it is not surprising to learn that the Admiral has asked for reinforcements. That they "have been refused him ia both amazing and disquieting, and this fact alone affords ample justification for tihe recent debate.

In oth*r respects ft is evident the English Navy needs overhalQing. Not only "have we not ships enough ready for sea, but of those that we have it may generally be said that they carry fewer guns to t&eir displacement than do the warships of foreign Powers, and that they have no advantage in amnour protection. A numDer of them are cumbered: up with- woodwork, which would be a serioue danger in action. Included ift the effective list*r« no fewer than twenty-two muzzle-loader armed ships, which aje obsolete and useless for purposes of moojern warfare. T&ere is a general out-of-dateness about the'fleet which, as might be expected-, is reflected in the Naval dockyards. Will it be credited, *«r" example, that there is no electric light in the Portsmouth dockyard, and that tihe machinery is much of it twenty or even thirty years out of date? Yet Mr Wiison assures us that at Devonpoxt and Chatham matters are as bad, and at Pembroke even worse. Compare all this with the efficiency and smartness with which Germany is building up a strong ar.d up-to-date Navy. Her workshops are supplied with electric light, and' the most modern tools. "Germany," says M. Lockroy, "views war aa she does "one of the national industries. .She "nurses h«r Navy as though it were a "commercial undertaking. ... What

"dominates our attention is not so much "the number of her ships as her applioa- " tion of method to the acquisition of naval

supremacy." Mr Wilson declares that it is the German Navy which is going to be in the very near future a most formidable rival. "In the German Navy," be adds, "and in "the German organisation one can find " nothing -to blame, and> very much to

"'praise. They are already the model for " the world."

'- It is time, therefore, that England began to bestir herself in this matter, and we are glad that Ministers have been roused to a sense of their duty by the House of Commons. But have we in the colonies no responsibility in this matter? Most assuredly we have. Our existence, as much as that of the United Kingdom, depends upon the invincibility of the British Navy bsidg maintained. At present we in New Zealutid contribute some £20,000 a year — less than 6d per bead of the population—■ to the support of the Navr. It is time

that contribution was materially increased,

We ought also to «ipply to the Navy sailors and officers, bred in these islands. We sent forth our sons, and we spent our money freely the instant it appeared! that the Mother Country was in need at the beginning of tfbe South African war. It would ibe too late to offer assistance, if once she were worsted at the outset of a

naval war. "It must be remembered," says Mr Wilson, "that in a naval conflict the " opening moves are made before the 'struggle begins, and , upon these opening "moves will depend victory at sea." Wβ must make the Navy strong before war begins if we are ever to do it at all, and the colonies must do their part. We should like to see New Zealand α-gain lead tiie way. Before the present session closes New Zealand should make a substantial increase in its contribution to the British Navy, and invite the Commonwealth 'Parliament to do the same. We should make the joint contribution of such an amount that we could fairly aek to have larger and more up-to-date vessels sent to take the place of the present Australian squadron. This is necessary, not onjy from the point of view of out local defence, but in order to afford a means of reinforcing the China squadron in case of need.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19010709.2.21

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11012, 9 July 1901, Page 4

Word Count
1,413

The Press. TUESDAY, JULY 9, 1901. THE WEAKNESS OF THE NAVY. Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11012, 9 July 1901, Page 4

The Press. TUESDAY, JULY 9, 1901. THE WEAKNESS OF THE NAVY. Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11012, 9 July 1901, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert