THE PUBLIC AND THE ADMIRALTY.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 13377, 19 March 1909, Page 6

THE PUBLIC AND THE ADMIRALTY.

When the future historian of England deals with tlie period from 1880 to 1909 he will note with astonishment the frequency of naval scares. It will seem to him amazing that there should ever have been cause for such anxiety; he will think it incredible that the vital necessity of naval supremacy should ever have been forgotten by men responsible for the safety of a country that had a glorious naval history, and was dependent on the command' of the sea for its very existence. Yet if it had not been for repeated agitation by people outside the service. Great Britain might to-day be slowly and painfully recovering from some tremendous naval defeat. It is interesting to compare the naval situation to-day with that in the eighties. Few of the younger generation to-day realise in what peril the Empire was placed in those years owing to the parsimony and incapacity of *hose responsible for naval defence. The authorities were wedded to a system of passive defence —against all the teachings of history—by which money was spent on fortifications and coast defence vessels, and the mobile portions of the navy were starved. Great Britain's naval strength had been allowed to decline until the annual vote for shipbuilding was equalled or exceeded by that of France. Admiral Colomb declared the . navy to be not superior to that of France alone, and Lord Charles Bores<ford in after years gave it as his opinion that if FTanco had attacked England she would probably have won.

The navy was not organised for war. It : had no Intelligence Department. The few ships that were provided were starved. Year after year the Admiralty's demands for ordinance were ruthlessly cut down by the War Office, which had control of the Ordnance Department. Between 1870 and 1885 the personnel dwindled from 61,000 to 57,000, and when an increase in ships was provided for in 1885, no provision was made for increasine theme a. Fortunately there were officers and civilians who had a truer idea of England's needs than the inert mandarins at the Admiralty and the Treasury. Mr W. T. Stead, whom young colonials class as a. "Little Englander," opened the campaign in 1884 with a series of articles in the "Pall Mall Gazette." The articles caused a profound sensation, and deeply stirred the public mind. Meetings were held in the City protesting against the Government's policy. From then onwards to 1889 there was a continual campaign for a stronger and better organised navy. Lord Charles Beresford did splendid service in the cause of reform. He has told, in way, how when he was a Junior Lord of the Admiralty, the annual estimates for coal, for the supply of which he was responsible, vrere brought to him for his signature. He told the clerk in true Beresford language thafr the supply set down in the document was quite inadequate, and that he would not sign. The pained official assured him that his signature was merely a matter of form, but Lord Charles had a different conception of his duty. He did not sign, but resigned, and went to' strengthen the enemies' camp. In 1889 the Xaval Defence Act, which provided for a special grant of £20,000,000, was passed as the result of popular pressure, and that particular crisis _ was over. From that year dates our present naval policy, based on the twoPower standard. To-day, while the nary is infinitely stronger than it was in 1884, and infinitely more ready for war, expert and public opinion is again pressing on the authorities the absolute necessity of decisively out-building a threatening Power. The more closely one examines the situation, the more serious does it seem. Its gravity is perhaps most strongly indicated by the fact that it has compelled practically the "Little Navy" politicians and papers to agree to the extended ship-building programme that, inadequate as it is, has hitherto been ttate object of their bitter opposition.

ST. HELENS- HOSPITALS. The unique gathering of young Xpw Zealanders at the St. Helens Hospital in Chrietchurch yesterday was, as Dr. Valintine said, an object lesson of the splendid work the institution is doing. Among the various schemes and enterprises which Mr Seddon carried out during his long Premiership were many which bulked more largely in the public eye than the St. Helens Hospitals, but few. we imagine, of greater national usefulness. They represent one of the numerous additions to the State's responsibilities which have come into existence in recent years, but in this caso the purpose is so excellent, the work so admirable, that little or no criticism is provoked. To quote Dr. Valintine, they were founded to make things better for the mothers, and to act as trainingschools for midwives, of whom some thirty are sent out every year. During: tho year ending last March, 667 babies were born in the four St. Helens Hospitals, of whom only four died, and a largo number of mothers were also attended in their own homes by St. Helens nurses. The mothers are given skilled attention which they could not secure under any other circumstances, and they also receive instruction in their maternal duties which cannot fail to be of subsequent benefit to themselves and their children, and hence to tho nation. New Zealand needs population, but its best population is home-grown, and each of the St. Helens Hospitals is doing its share in ensuring that the little New Zealanders who make their first appearance within its walls have a fair chance of becoming healthy citisons. With all this in their favour, the institutions constitute one of those Departments of the -State to which none can object.' As a matter of fact, their coet is comparatively very small. The InspectorGeneral, in his last annual report, calculated that after allowing for the revenue from patients and probationers' fees, eaoh St. Helens baby costs tho country £1. It is true that no account was taken, in this estimate, of the capital expenditure on the hospitals, but even if the addition of this raised the cost per head to £2, it would surely- be money well spent. The Christchurch St. Helens is not housed in tho best building that could be imagined, but according to Miss 'Maclean, the Assistant-Inspector, it is much more up-to-<late- and easier to work than any of the others, and its past success affords promise of a still more useful future.