THE GREY RIVER ARGUS MONDAY, July 27th., 1925 OBJECT OF U.S.A. NAVAL CRUISE.

Grey River Argus, 27 July 1925, Page 4

THE GREY RIVER ARGUS MONDAY, July 27th., 1925 OBJECT OF U.S.A. NAVAL CRUISE.

The present costly cruise, the second within eighteen years, into waters so far as ours are beyond its regular range, by the vast fleet of the United States, is a phe lonienon of imperialism. The spectacle of friendliness which is at present its outward or more obvious significance is not by any means its inner meaning. It is

fu idamentally a symbol of force. There are those who welcome such symbolism, and those who fear it. The ,one type is represented by the cabled utterance in America a few days ago by an Australian clergyman, who is about to tour Britain as an advocate of emigration, Archdeacon Dore-Bry-ant, of Monaro, who told the Americans, after they had sent that great Armada to the country of the speaker, that they were blind to the fact that in a few years they would have trouble with Japan, who was aggressive now’ and would grow more so, and who could pour two or three million soldiers into Australia before she could get assistance from any British units. The Archdeacon, whom the cable people gave such prominence in their publicity on the day the American warships entered Australian ports, expressed his “particular” astonishment aid amazement at the laxity of the United States in connexion with the Pacific problem. The type of mind fearful of what such a gesture or

demonstration of force as the American Fleet cruise means, stra.igely enough, is equally well reflected in the speech Oi a Japanese, Count Miehimosa Sayeshinia a couple of days ago cabled from America, who advocated an international conference for peace, expressing alarm at warlike tendencies again manifesting themselves in various parts of the world. Ho was obviously thinking of the American naval demoustra-

tidii during the past few months in the Pacific, and of the renewed armament race, which the imperialistic powers are no longer at any pains to camouflage. If the Japanese are

disposed to give their resentment at being excluded in toto from AngloAmerican territory the form of aggression, it is certain that talk such as that of the Australian clergyman is far more calculated to encourage them to do so. It is, at the same time, moonshine to declare that Americans are sitting on a volcano, or that they arc not arming themselves sufficiently for war with Japan. The Fleet cruise is nothing else but an evidence of the very contrary. So far as Japan’s aims are concerned, she is an imperialistic power, whose rulers are certainly just as prone to pin their policy to firmaments as the ofT.er imperialistic powers, and the reason why there con-

tinues to be a race in armaments, as well as propaganda for another world war, is that the several dominant powers in the Pacific rely o.r force—physical force —whilst they profess to be guided bv moral force. It would be unjust, of course, to allot all the blame to any particular one, but the whole system of imperialism breeds!

both suspicion and aggression. Putting on the brake at a Mashingtoi Conference may seem to be a harbinger of peace, but before a limitation of naval construction has been a year or two in vogue, there are those who raise up their voices to sound the tocsin of war, and declare the only

hope of keeping the peace is to prepare for a war. Apart altogether from trade rivalries and emigration, the surest guarantee of peace in the Pacific is to decrease uniformity then naval construction, and the interested

Powers would get the backing of the great majority were they to extend the Washington limitation much fur ther. The feverish construction of ships within the limits laid down — that is, vessels of other than the largest types—is a mere indication that

the right spirit is not animating the rulers of the powers concerned, a.id could not have been the sole inspiration of the Washington limitation. Admittedly the immigration crux is at present apparently insoluble, but it has never been demonstrated that the consequence or that the final solution of that question must, be sought in war and war alone. Certainly there is the possibility of war arising, mi: trade rivalry in China is a factor in such a possibility as well as emigration, and it should be as feasible to avoid hos-

tilities in the one ease as in the other. I.i any event, the glamour which at present so obviously surrounds the American Fleet visit does not, as already remarked, arise from reflection upon its serious objective, and should not be allowed therefore to obscure in the public eye the very serious possibility which the cruise really symbolises.