BATTLESHIP STRENGTH

Evening Star, Issue 18832, 5 January 1925, Page 1

BATTLESHIP STRENGTH

PRESENT BRITISH POSITION SCRAPPING THE SURPLUS. The receit agitation in the United States to stop the wrapping of the battleship Washington, as provided for under the Naval Treaty, has directed attention to the present position of that pact and to the steps taken to comply with its provisions (says the naval correspondent of ‘The Times’). Signed on February 6, 1922, and ratified on August 16, 1926, the treaty provided, in so far as the -vessels to be scrapped are concerned, that these should bo finally disposed of within eighteen months of its coming into force. That period will terminate therefore on February IS next, and in Britain, America, and Japan preparations are now going forward to demolish the last of the units specified in this connection. In the case of the United States, some opposition has been shown to the destruction of the battleship Washington. This ship was one of four authorised in 1916, of which three—the Maryland, West Virginia, and Colorado—are allowed to be retained under the treaty. The chief opponent of the destruction of the Washington, Mr W. B, Shearer, brought an action in a local court against the Secretary of the Navy to show cause why the Navy Department should not •bo restrained from its action, and in the course of his indictment made various assertions which call for correction. There is no secrecy in regard to the matters dealt with, a fact which renders it the more surprising that he should be so misinformed. LAST BRITISH SHIP SCRAPPED. * Mir Shearer first contended that the United States is the only party to the FivePower Treaty which lias carried out the provisions calling for the scrapping of capital ships. Franco and Italy, however, have no ships yet due for scrapping—the first French ship, the Joan Bart, can bo retained until 1930; the first Italian, the Dante Alighieri, until 1931. Japan has notified progress from time to time with the scrapping of the ton completed battleships of which she had to dispose; while as regards the twenty-four British ships, the last is the Monanh, which will be sunk off Portsmouth ia January. If possible, she will be used as a target; if not, she will bo scuttled. In either case she will bo at the bottom of the sea before February 16, Mr Shearer can have no real ground'for complaint on this point. It is difficult to see now this American writer substantiates his assertion that “ the British Government has continued to maintain a navy of 711,000 capital ship tonnage.” Parliamentary Paper No. 41 of 1924 shows that we have eighteen battleships of 457,750 aggregate tons, and font •battle cruisers of "122,700 aggregate ton*, making a total of 580,450, which is pret cisely the figure in Chapter 11., Part L, of the treaty. Even if he included the Nelson and Rodney, now building, those ships would add only 70,000 tons to the aggregate; and the inclusion of the Monarch, already mentioned, the Colossus, which we are allowed to use as a -training ship for boys, and the Agcmemnon, which similarly has no war value, having been used for target experiments for three years, would only increase bis figure to 709,450 tons._ Ha is clearly very much out in his reckoning. THE NELSON AND RODNEY. A third mistake refers to the condition of the Nelson and Rodney, the two battleships Great Britain is allowed to build under the treaty, and now under construction on the Tyne and Mersey. complains that the King George V., Ajax, Centurion, and Thunderer have not been destroyed, although this country is under ym obligation to dispose of them on the completion of the two new ships. The truth is that the new ships, although Mr Shearer believes that they are nearly complete, are not yet in the water. Laid down in December, 1922, they were expected to occupy three years in building, or up to December, 1925, but the boilermakers’ dispute last year seriously retarded them, and it has since been staled by the Secretary of the Admiralty that it is very doubtful whether the valuable time so lost will bo regained durin"- the succeeding contract building period. It will thus be many months yet before the Nelson and Rodney become effective ships of wav This being so the objection in regard to the King George V. class falls to the ground. These four vessels are all in reserve commission at homo.. Under the rules for scrapping appended to the treaty, the work of rendering such vessels incapable of further warlike service must be begun not later than the date of completion of their successors, and must bo finished within six months from the dale of such completion. The Nelson and Rodney will certainly not 1)0 road'- until ]926, and therefore no steps are called for until then in regard to the ships they replace. A fourth point made by Mr Shearer is (hat Japan is far superior in naval force in the United Slates. This needs qualification, for it could ho true only if it referred solely to her own waters. To maintain a, fleet' in the Far East equal to that of Japan, Britain or America, would need to have at disposal, (o allow for refit, rest, and replenishment, a ior-’c much greater than the ratio of five m three allowed under the treat'. - . This is recognised by all who have Studied the naval situation m the Pacific. But it, is a matter quite apart from the carrying out of the agreement signed bv the Bowers at Washington. While the destruction of so fine a vessel as ihc Washington naturally arouses feelings of regret among many people, _ the courso followed is mert-lv a repetition of that taken in England and japan, mu! marks the consummation of a measure of voluntary dixarmament in peaeo time unprecedented la the world’s Imimy.