NAVAL NOTES

Evening Star, Issue 14554, 1 May 1911, Page 2

NAVAL NOTES

[CoNTEIBETED- BY THE 'NAVX LIAQUB, OXAGO BBAJiCH.I UNSEEMLY "DISSENSIONS. "We can, my dear Coll, havo no little jealousies. We'bave only one great object in view—that of annihihting our enemies." —Nelson to Collingwood, October 9, 1805. Admiral?Collingwood, with some of the captains, having gone on board the Victory- tc receive instructions, 'Nelson inquired of rn.ni where his captain was, and was told rfreply that they were not upon good terms with" each other. " Terms!" said Nelson. "Good terms with each other!" Immediately he sent a boat for Captain Uotherham," led him, as scon as he arrived, to Collirc.wood. and saying "•Look, yonder arc the enemy!" bade them shake hands like Englishmen.— Sonthcy's ' Nelson.' THE IMPERIAL MARITIMERS. A good deal of surprised comment has on more than cue occasion been made concerning the organising and manning of the two distinct, almost antagonistic, leagues, each of whom profanes to desire the same object. To an outsider the existence of two leagues- implies much wasted effort and unnecessary duplication of machinery. What purpose,"other tha.ii a personal one, is thus served it is hard to tell, and an examination of the available evidence lead 6 to the conclusion that it, is temperament rather than common sense which dictated the policy that ultimately led to a split. Messrs Wyutt and Morton, who are the responsible authors and secretaries of the Imperial Maritimers, are men of strong views and gifted with the doubtful blessing of strongly expressing them. Their fundamental error seems to be that, in their judgment. Governments, Boards of Admiralty, Foreign Scretaries, and (statesreen generally are wilfully and wickedly iterant, some of them not far removed from traitors, all of them untrustworthy, and that in the members of the Imperial Maritimers ahwio are to be found true knowledge and sound doctrine. Necessarily this attitude creates hostility, tends to partisanship, and fails to convince. To promote petitions a-i-ainst a Budget, to demand a JDICO.CCO.COO loan, hysterically. vehemently, xu:d abusively to denounce the Declarnti-jn of London are questionable methods of educating, the public anywhere as to the uecd of a supreme navy. It may be a:x>-pted as a safe platform whereon to stand that no Government and no Board of Admiralty :j" made up of traitors, knaves iVols, and imbeciles. They are as; loyal to their King and Empire as their calumniators. WHAT THEY DEMAND. Stuns: into feme kind of action, the Imperial Maritim-.TS on February 14, 1911, submitted a public statement of their position to the Navy Le ><_ rue '• with tho object of securing if possible future unity of aim." This was acknowledged by the League on Man-h 13. For convenience 6akt the statements ;w.d answers thereto are given together. A STRATEGY DEPARTMENT. The Imperial Maritime League have consistently advocated the creation of a Strategy Department at the Admiralty, having author'tv in nutters strategical. Mr Spenser Wilkinson founded the Navy League, with the express purpose of securing that Tesult. and In has publicly stated that he rudgned when the Navy League abandoned that purpose. The need of a General Staff for the Navy has been recognised by almost every student of naval wut. since the rkrht direction of •force is equally important with its possession. Are the General Council of the Navv League now disposed to resume this original aim ? Answer : TV Nnvj League are still in favor of the crentwui of a Strategy Department at the Admiralty. INTERNATIOX AL TRIBUNALS. The Imperial Maritime League have been engaged for nearly two years past in ceaseless endeavor to awaken the country to the immerse perils which would be created by the subordination of our National Conns to an International Naval Tribunal at the Ha.gue, and by the ratification of the Declaration of London. It regards both the.-e measures ns certain to inflict the most direct and deadly injury on Great Britain :v:<\ on the British Empire, and it has succeeded to a large extent in T"using public opinion aca.inst them. D:> th" Council of the Navy League endorse this action and this view? Answer : The Navy League, for reasons wheih have been duly published, are not in favor of the ratification of the Declaration of London. DEBOUNCING AND ATTACKING. The Imperial Maritime League believe that the only construction of the phrase "non-party" which decs not paralyse its action is that which leave* it bound to attack and to denounce anv Government— Unionist. Liberal, or Socialist, which cuts down the Navy or subordinates naval interests to party ends. Answer: The Navy League \s conducted on strictly non-naity lines. The Navy League do not widi to rely for the force and effect of their propaganda on any statements which fall short of the whole truth, for it is only by fair statements of the whole case th.it national unity of opinion in Th* matter of the Navy can possibly be obf/dnc/l. Tho Leacrue would welcome co-operation with any public body which has as itf object the maintenance of rden'iate sea power, but regards as essential for effective co-operation that the methods as well n<-. the aims of those concerned should be identical. Nov.-, you say that your method is that of "'attacking and denouncing" any Government or person." whose views arc not in accordance with vor.r own, and this b a method which docs not commend itself lo the Navy League, who hope to attain better results, as well as to avoid deploriblo national divisions on this all-important subject, bv educating public opinion without prejudice or passion of any kind. A £100,000,000 LOAN. In view of the fact that our naval iupremacv must ppss with the passing of our pre-Dreadnought armored ships unless a great shipbuilding effort be immediately begun, and in view also of the admitted deficiencies in our military and atrial me.vs of defence, tho Imperial Maritime Leacne have made public appeal to the Prime Minister to obiiin parliamentary sanction to a loan of £IOTOCO,OOO. This appeal has received the public endorsement and support of 510 officers of flag or general rank and of 1,020 other men of mak, many of whom also belong to one or other of the two services, and most of whom have received distinctions from their Sovereign. Answer: The Navy Lcairtio are in favor, and always havo been in favor, of a loan for the euuipment and maintenance of shore establishments, should that be found necessary, but they are opposed to fixing a loan at £-100,000.000, as your society adTocate. Wo assume, in the absence of any official evidence to the contrary, that the breach continues. SAMPLE " DENOUNCING." Speaking at a house dinner h»ld at the yafional Liberal Ci»b. Mr T. M'Kinnou Wood. Parliamentary Under-Secretary of the Foreign Office, lefeiT'd to the pictureposters that had been placarded over London in opposition to th" r::''*iea*ion of th<> Declaration of London. We believe we are correct in saving that these posters were issued under iV of the Imperial Mnritimes. Here is what Mr Wood ■ «aid of them : They found irresponsible people not only dealing with, this grave and important subject in the temper of partisans, hut crying to create unnecessary prejudice by tho crude and vulgar method of the picture poster. Could anyone imagine a subject more imsuited for this method of controversy? If there was a subject which shoidd be kept out of the ar' n na of party electioneering tactics, then he thought p-trio'ic men of every party wonld admit thi« was pre-eminently-such a subject. He d'd not raggest, and he did not bel We. that the leader's of any p'>rty in the State ap- • proved of these degrading tactirs. These > mendacicitts,statements were intended to convey; tM-'idea that, the Declaration of London ifonld render less secure the food supply' of this country in time ofvrar. Tljai was not only untrue, but ■was demonstrably the opposite of the truth. If Great Britain reftreed to ratify

this Declaration, she would have to face mjt oulyAtaV riski' butthe probability, that in time of war food would be., deabsolute oprtrobarid: No one . who, with open mind, considered the •provisions of the Declaration could denyx that the other Great Powero had given up their claim to declare food absolute contraband of war, which could be seized in" neutral ships, and had given way to Great Britain's contention that food in future should be considered conditional contraband. Thus the Declaration would increase and not diminish the security of our food supply. To refuse to ratify the Declaration would be one of the most serious international blunders of which any country could be guilty. It is hardly surprising that methods such as these do not commend themselves to the Navy League.