AUSTRALIAN NAVAL DEFENCE.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13103, 30 April 1908, Page 6

AUSTRALIAN NAVAL DEFENCE.

Speaking at Sydney yesterday, the Governor-Genoral of Australia referred to a matter which is of vital consequence to tho Commonwealth. Hβ was certain, ho said, that the Mother Country would, as far as possible, defend Australia, but she was twelve thousand miles away, and might at any moment have to fight for her own defence. Tho moral was obvious. "Aus- " tralia should take a large share in " her own defenoe, for her present im- •' munity could not be counted on as "permanent."' Lord Northcote could not, of course, express any opinions upon the scheme of homo defence, by compulsory military training, which Mr Doakin has put forward. Nor, apparently, did his position permit him to offer any opinion on the project for establishing an Australian navy. Ho spoke in tho general terms to which Governors are restricted, in- commenting on matters of policy which may become matters of party politics. An interesting expression of opinion on tho Australian, Navy schom© was, however, furnished lately "by no lees Nm authority than Lord Tweedmouth, then First ]/ord of tho Admiralty. British Cabinet Ministers are not A as a rule;

accessible to intcrviewere, and it was, therefore, a stroke of good fortune for the London correspondent of the "Sydney Morning Herald" when Lord Tweedmoiit>h agreed to state for the benefit of Australian readers tlio Admiralty's view of the Australian scheme. He pointed out that the present agreement has yet several yea rs to run. and that tho Admiralty were not disposed to end it of their own

initiative. "But we are quite pre- ' pared to meet Australia if that 'country desires to substitute somo

"other arrangement consistent -with "■what vo should regard as practic- " able. The amount of subsidy does " not nearly cover tho cost of niain- " tenance. For the year 1906-7 the "cost to ue -was £607,0-19. We re- " ceived from Australia and New Zea- " land £240,000. Wβ do not, however, " grumble at the cost, and we are " quite prepared to accept a reason- " able alternative proposal from Australia." Ho admitted a difficulty with regard to Now Zealand, who, he thought—and thought rightly—would probably bo prepared to increase tho present subsidy rather than discontinue it. Tho Admiralty, in the ovont of Australia's withdrawal, would have to meet the difficulty of keeping up a squadron for New Zealand a.lone. Tho Australian proposal for coast defence, it soems, is regarded by tho Admiralty ns «an excellent idea, and one tliat might work out most eerviceabJy in, time of war. "Wo presuppose," said Lord TwWmouth, "that the Australian scheme would comprise tho pn> " vision of small craft, and especially " submarines and destroyers. It would " be very difficult to carry these across " the ocean. It would be of great " advautago to us to find tlhom already " provided in tho Pacific, properly "equipped, and ready for service-." This will gratify tihe supporters of tho "local navy" proposal, but it was omipled with a condition, that may plense them leas. "Wo should expect,' , ndded tho First Lord, "tho Australian ''ships to pass over a-uitomatically to " 'he British AdmiTaul hi time of dan- " ger, bo that they migSlt bo used as "ho considered advisable." Such n-ti arrangement would conflict with 'Mr Doa-kin's idea of the Australian, ships being solel-y under Australian control, but ifc is cleiarly tho only arrange/mont by which the most effective use could bo made by them. Besides, as Lord Tweedmouth, who ovidently knows something of the jealousies between Australian! cities, remarked, it would obviwte a confliot of opinion between tihe States, or the States and the CommonweaHJh, as to how tho navy should bo aliocaited in time of danger. That in itself would bo no small advantage.