Reading for Everybody,

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2586, 21 August 1909, Page 3 (Supplement)

Reading for Everybody,

THE CONDITION OF THE NAVY.

LORD BERESFORD’S INDICTMENT. FAMOUS ADMIRAL AND THE NAVAL INQUIRY. (By William Maxwell, in the ‘‘Daily Mail.”) We understand that the Committee of the Cabinet appointed to investigate the charges brought by Lord Charles Beresford will give its verdict in favor of the Admiralty and Sir John Fisher. Upon issues so vital to the. Empire it is not to be expected that the Committee will publish any report, and it may even be doubted whether its judgment will have formal expression. But the result of the inquiry cannot be hidden. The inquire has revealed two things—that Lord Charles Beresford is neither so intimatelv acquainted with the details of Admiralty adminstration as his admirers believe, nor so successful in the witness-box as he can be on the platform. The principal ; charges which he Brought against the Admiralty may be put under three heads: That the Admiralty showed gross negligence in not providing a greater number of small cruisers and torpedo craft. That the distribution and organisation of the Fleet in Home waters were bad. That the Navy was not prepared for war and that the Admiralty had no “war plans.” Upon these points the investigation turned. During the early days of the inquiry Lord Charles Beresford was loud in his praise of the conduct and constitution of the Committee. Its members gave him every assistance in their power, but it was soon evident that Lord Charles Beresford without a f staff at liis elbow was in no position

to substantiate his charges. The i:ndictment was vague in terms anil grew -t" more and more shadowy under exam--1 ination. It may sound harsh, yet it is undeniable that in the opinion of expert witnesses and' impartial judges Lord Charles Beresford, while failing to establish his case, succeeded in proving his own lack of acquaintance with the condition of the Navy and its higher administration. Upon the first point—the lack of small cruisers and torpedo craft —he -showed want of knowledge of what has been done in that direction. Upon the question of organisation and distribution he had no case to uphold, seeing that the policy he had .advocated is the policy of the Board of Admirality. j Upon the question of preparedness for war Lord Charles was equally unfortunate. In his speech early in July the noble Lord showed a reticence on the issue before the Committee of the Cabinet that cannot be described ..as characteristic. ;i He touched, however, upon some important controversies that bear .. directly on tlie questions before the Committee. Let me deal with these points. ARREARS OF SHIPBUILDING. There are no arrears. Our position for two years at any rate is secure. FALSE ECONOMICS.

Upon this charge Lord Charles Berestford is characteristically vague. There » have been economies—even substantial economies—it is true; yet the strength - of the Navy is at the present moment overwhelming, and the taxpayer has benefited.

STRATEGIC DEPARTMENT. Such a department is certainly most ■ desirable; but it cannot be created ■either by a platform oration or by a stroke of the pen. The men for such work are not ready-made. It is at least a credit to the Admiralty that they have recognised this requirement and have been for three years steadily , -creating a strategic department which W is even now being actually consolidated. T It is by the way, a notable featuro in Lord Charles Beresford’s career as an agitator that he often agitates for things which he knows are already de•.■eided upon or even -faits accomplis. Jdo is thus enabled to take his share of tho •credit for them. THE PROPOSED PROGRAMME. Here Lord Charles Beresford is ambiguous. If he wants ten battleships by ’1914, including the extra four this year, this would mean only three in each Estimates for 1910 and 1911. It is needless to point out that more than this ''•number would be built in the ordinary course. He asks for eighteen secondclass cruisers, eighteen commerce cruisers, and twenty-four small cruisers —that is fifty, or at the rate of seventeen a year. This is a preposterous proposal. Our preponderance m armcured cruisers is overwhelming—tbirty.■eight compared with the seven of Germany, for example. , FLOATING DOCKS.

Lord Charles Beresford knows that -these are to be provided, and—-charac-iteristically enough—he puts them in his demand. DEPLETED STORES. Doubtless Lord Charles Beresford founds this charge on. the fact that soon after the victualing changes were introduced bv the Admiralty, and before tho system was properly established, his ships were unable to draw the full amounts on the new scale when i suddenly ordered them, to complete with three months provisions. To© l ® 1 ' is, I believe, no other basis for the insinuation. COAL. The ireservee of coal, everywhere abroad are complete. At home we get cour supplies direct from the collieries, and maintain a reserve only tor tirsr needs. This reserve is also complete. Can we imagine a coal strike during, war? •

AMMUNITION. There reserves, too, are complete ■ and ample. It is a credit to the Admirlaty that in the past two years, or so they have made good former deficiencies in respect, not only of reserves of am-' but'cf reserves of guns.

THE INDICTMENT. LORD- CHARLES~BERESFORD’S ATTACK. It was in the hall of the Merchant Taylors’ Company that Lord Charles Beresford started his new (and personal). Navy campaign. Lord Charles spoke on the grave warnings given by Mr. Asquith Sir Edward Grey, and Mr. Balfour. vY hat the people wanted now was a definite programme to achieve the patriotic determinations expressed. “If we adopt a ship-building programme now I am inclined to think that the wild and insane competition now proceeding between the naval Powers will cease. The position is more serious than is generally. known, but that is no reason for panic or hysteria, or for small party recriminations. Our nolicy must be on a big," broad, national lines. Party differences have nothing to do with national defence.” (Cheers.) ABSENCE OF STRATEGY.

The main causes of the serious state of affairs now existing were three in number: (1) Large arrears in shipbuilding, (2) false economies, and (3) the absence of a proper strategical department of the Admiralty to keep us quietly abreast of our war-like needs. ' I deplore the ridiculous 1 situation m which we have placed ourselves with regard to Germany. We humiliated ourselves by imploring Germany not to go- on with her shipbuilding programme because we wanted our money for social reform; then, when Germany lookeel after 'her own business we her by describing lier action as treachcrons', cowardly, underhand, and unscrupulous.” After reference to his former success in drafting a shipbuilding programme Lord Charles Beresford advanced another, which (he says) has been drawn up with the assistance of friends whose knowledge of war and shipbuilding are supreme. The programme, intended to be completed by March 31, 1914, is as follows: Battleships (including the extra four which the Unionists are now demanding) 10 Second-class cruisers 1® Commerce-protected cruisers ••• 1® Destroyers of a new and enlarged type ... , Hocks IR nnn Extra men ••• 16,0UU

Restoration of depleted stores, coal supply, and ammunition. Total cost from £55,000,000 to £60,000,000. “This country possesses forty battleships of the pre-Dreadnouglit tvpes.. Many of us think they are better ships than the Dreadnought. In any case they are excellent ships. Yet these lunatics declare that we have got to scrap them! MORE MEN AND DESTROYERS. “It is true that the proposal I make does not allow for the possibility of German acceleration, nor for the proposed laying down of four Dreadnoughts by Austria. Let us talk about those things when they happen, hot before. The policy of the Admiralty is wrong. It has been dictated by tales economy, and dees not make your fleet efficient, or anything like it. W hen the controversy started this country proposed a four-Power standard in big ships. At the present rate we shall scarcely have a one-Power standard in 1914. But if these wild men had their •way they would run us into an exdenditure of 200 millioins sterling and bankrupt the country.” Lord Charles spoke in detail of his other proposals. He wants nfty-two more destroyers, bringing the total up to 134. Seamen should be obtained at once, for it takes six years to train a seamangunner and a lifetime to train a capable officer.

One resolution was carried amid applause declaring the Government programme inadequate, and! another requesting the Chamber of Commerce to consider Lord Charles’ address with a view to vigorous action by the chambers of commerce of the Empire.

A GERMAN IN ENGLAND.

lI.—DISCOVERING LONDONERS

(By Oscar T. Scliweriner, in tlie “Daily Mail.”)

[The following article is from'the pen of Dr. Schwemier, the well-known German writer. It is printed exactly as writen in English by the author. |

Somewhere I have read about people “discovering Loudon.” It is well said, but it strikes me that London does not want much discovering; it is there for all to see. A thing much more difficult to accomplish is the discovery of a Londoner. Anyone thinking it an easy matter to discover a Londoner —I wonder is he synonymous with Englishman—is very much mistaken. You have to be after him tooth and nail. You first have to burst through steel armour, then dig your way through any amount of other fortifications, and finally melt a crust of ice. But after you liavo succeeded in all this you are paid manifold for your trouble. You will suddenly find yourself stumbling upon a gold mine in a place where you had been led to believe only a desert existed. Yen will have discovered a heart of gold. You will behold ■ the Londoner, as lie is, not as ho would like folks to think him. ON BEING “INTRODUCED.” What a complicated thing is the character of the Londoner! Out of pure shyness she becomes disagreeably abrupt, out of pure fear of intrusion he becomes unsociable. A number of unacquainted men in the same tram-way-car would never think of entering, into conversation as they would anywhere else in tlie world. “Proper” introductions is one of the characteristics of the Londoner. In Germany when a man enters a private room containing people he does not know, or if he sits down to a table outside a restaurant, in fact whenever he comes into touch with a stranger, he will bow and announce his name. He will introduce himself. Then both will chat like old acquaintances. But it is ten to one that neither of them caught the mumbled name of the other, nor did they care. To both of them their meeting has been an episode, to be forgotten the very next second. And it not infrequently happens that a man will turn to some friend, asking, “Did you sec me talk to' that man? Who is lie? He mentioned his name but I did not quite catch it.” Now in England to walk into a room where there is a private gathering and to go round from one to another introducing yourself. would, as I see, be called bad manners. The Englishman wants'to be introduced by a third person, and it seems that this third person will introduce the other two only if he thinks they would actually like to know each other. Then, however, the name is not only mumbled or mentioned, but grappled with. The two men at once impress that, name upon their minds, associate the person with the name, and forget neither the onO nor the other. An introduction in London does not seem an episode to me, to be over and done with the next second, but always tho beginning of an actual friendship. And where friendship is not likely to ensure an introduction is left aside. MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF NATIONS.

It is very characteristic, and I must say I like it. Now the very fact that I can honestly say “I like it” speaks volumes. For if only a week ago someone, had told me in Germany that it is possible for a number of people to- gather in the same private room without either being taken round by the host and introduced to one and all, or at least making the tour himself, I should have said, “How unsociable!” To-day I prefer the English way to our own, because I understand the Englishman’s reason.

When all that ridiculous t«ii about German airships in England was going on, we over there opened our eyes wide in astonishment. Was it possible? Could the wide-awake Englishman believe such rubbish? But then, didn’t we have proof that he believed it-?• Wasn’t all England excited about it? But if the good Berliners had, all of them, been here only as long as I have been hero to-day, only one short week, how they would have enjoyed the joke. For they would have not only missed the much-talked-of excitement in England, but would have found, as I find, that hardly a soul believed a -word of all the gruesome tales. I have talked with airports of people—and I believe one does not easily detect the German in my pronounciation of the English language—-not a man have I found so far who would acknowledge that he had believed those airship stories. If we had only known England and the English better we should have joined in the laugh heartily, and many a hard word would have remained unsaid.

Thgt is the keynote of all tho trouble. If Germans only knew English better! And Englishmen German! For what the English do' not know about Germany and the Germans would fill a library. To the average Londoner we are still, I find, horseflesh and black bread eaters. A PROPOSAL.

But even leaving aside misrepresentation, it is so very difficult for one people truly to learn to know another. Just as surely as the average Englishman has not tho slightest idea of the real Germany of to-day, nor the German of England, just as surely would they clasp hands and be friends if only all knew and understood all. . Just as surely as every German says to-day: “War with England will never bo—unEngland starts it,” and every Englishman whom I ask says to me: “War with Germany will never be —unless Germany ' starts it,” just as surely Would both, if they would only get over this . miserable misunderstanding, say ; '‘‘Npw nvhat can we dQ "her along?” I am saying tlns'-becausc I have become absolutely convinced of it. The Englishman, once you really know him, is the best-hearted of men: he is hospitable, charitable, above all—a true friend. I believe that because everything lie says to me carries the stamp of conviction, goes down to tho very heart. The German I know- to be more light-hearted, carrying his Heart a bit more ; upon his sleeve. But every Englishman of, the few who really know

him agrees that he is a good fellow and possesses the very qualities .the Englishman admires. For two such nations to become really acquainted would mean to'become friends. Comes the question: How could they get to know each other thoroughly? And here I have thought of a league : Let, for a beginning, several thousands of the London and Berlin middle class combine and exchange their sons and their daughters for, say, about a year. Wherever there is a house m England or Germany with a son or a daughter to spare- let them be exchanged. (To be Continued.)