AUSTRALIA'S DEFENCES.

Evening Post, Volume LXX, Issue 60, 8 September 1905, Page 5

AUSTRALIA'S DEFENCES.

* PROPOSED INCREASE OF NAVAL I CONTRIBUTION. i [press association.! MELBOURNE, 7th September, j Mr. W. H. Kelly, member for Wentworth 1 , moved the following motion in the House of Representatives tonight: — "That, whereas command of the seas in time of war is essential to the security of the Empire's vast in* terests on and beyond the seas, and this command cannot be Assured by separate squadrons acting independently, and whereas the United Kingdom sooner or later will be unable to continue to make sufficient provision against the rapidly-increas-ing naval armaments of foreign Powers, the Commonwealth contribution to the Imperial Navy be doubled." Mr. Kelly emphasised the point that Australia's only hope against an enemy was for the enemy to be sought out near j his base and destroyed, instead of trust- i ing to repelling an attack on Australia's j own coasts. ' This could only be done by | the Imperial Navy acting aa a whole. The position had become more acute by ! the mention oi a new first-class naval Power in the Far East. The moment the people of Australia had both sides of the question put before them they would decide to contribute to the Imperial Navy in preference to starting a purely Australian Navy. The debate was adjourned. COMMENTS ON THE MOTION. ' (Received September 8, 9.57 a.m.) . SYDNEY, This Day. The Sydne^ Morning Herald protests against the proposed increase of the Naval subsidy. It says: — "If we spend on,the maintenance of an Imperial squadron in our waters all the money a small community grappling with a great problem can spare fpr defence, we are bound to lose the healthy spirit of self-reliance. We hope the Honse will emphatically oppose the attempts, from whatever quarter, to exploit Australian loyalty. Wo may be unprofitable servants, but we are doing what we can, and are discharging our obligations to the Imperial Navy and Empire in proportion to our capacity, and it is not fair to require more." The journal concludes by condemning this "new, restless spirit of the Imperial Agent, bent on extracting more subsidy! and engaging us in new indefinite Imperial commitments."