The Hastings Standard Published Daily. THURSDAY, DEC. 31, 1896. NAVAL SUPREMACY.

Hastings Standard, Issue 209, 31 December 1896, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Daily.

THURSDAY, DEC. 31, 1896. NAVAL SUPREMACY.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrongs that need resistance. For the future in the distance, And the good that we can do.

It is agreed upon all sides that the

British Empire, if it is to be kept intact, must look to Great Britain's supremacy at sea for safety. It was this feeling that early in the year when England found herself in " splendid isolation " impelled the Salisbury Government to greatly increase the naval expenditure. According to a Parliamentary return made at the end of last January it appeared that Great Britain owned 384 ships above the size of a torpedo boat, while France (160) Russia (90) and Germany (81) had only 831 between them. These ships are divided into four classes—battle ships, coast defence ships, cruisers and other ships. With 46 battle ships completed and 10 building Great Britain at present holds a clear lead of the next two powers —France with 25 and 9 building, and Germany with 20 and 3—but she will have lost this lead by the time the ships building are ready to go to sea. If coast defence ships in the fleet available for battle are counted, England isatpresent 9 behind and will shortly be 11. In cruisers the return gives the British Navy 126 ships against 181 of the other five European Powers. In other hips, however, she losses her advaot-

age .somewhat, the figures standing at 181 to 107. When the naval vote for 1896 was taken, the First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr Goschen, announced that the position of the navy in 1899 would be one "on which we may stand." This view is generally recognised as being too optimistic, and The Times quite recently urged a further expenditure on the Navy. Indeed this course would seem to be imperative if we are to maintain our supremacy, for Russia, France, Germany, the United States and -Japan, are increasing their naval expenditure, Mr G. W. Stevens who has recently published a work- on naval policy holds that England is not ready to go to war, because she is weak in ships, weak in men and weak in guns. Taking the end of 1899, when the new ships in course of construction will be completed, of the battleships, includinir const defence ships, armoured gunboats and the like, but omitting all ships classed as armed cruisers, Great Britain will have 71, France 49, Russia 40, Germany 85, Italy 18, and the United States 18. But many British ships have only muzzle-loaders, and if we reckon only those carrying heavy breech-loaders, the British number will be cut down to 18, while the other totals will remain the same. This system of allowing the British fleet to fall so far behind in heavy artillery is one with which Mr Stevens finds great fault. Comparing the battleships armed with breech-loaders and heavy quick lirers, which are likely to play a great part in the naval warfare of the future, we find that Great Britain will have in 1899 80, France 30, Russia 18, Germany 21, Italy and the United 18, States 9. But Great Britain does not really compare so badly as these figures seem to show, for the pieces possessed by France are distributed over more ships, and at present British battleships mount 2(>o quickfirers to the French 1 (55, while in three years she will actually have 510 to the French 261. lint Russia, though at present is unready is coming up fast, and in three years France with any one European power, will be at least equal to England, while a coalition of three ought to possess a decided superiority. The general results of Mr Steven's comparison is that the British naval position in regard to other powers is growing worse instead of better, that in attacking power she is inferior to the two next nations, while in breech loading artillery she is inferior to Franco alone. In the protection of her ships she is already falling behind any two of the priucipal powers, while even in coal endurance and speed her rivals are fast reducing her lead. Mr Stevens contends, basing his estimate on the relative commerce of the different countries, that in a war against France and Russia, England should have five battleships for every three of the enemy. She wants on this basis 44 more powerful cruisers by 1900, and to them must be added K2 scouts to accompany her battleships. With Lord Charles Beresford and others agitating about the manning of the navy, and Mr Stevens, Sir Charles Dilke, Admiral Colomb, and Mr H. W. Wilson stirring up the nation with respect to naval requirements we may expect to see in April next when the Budget is presented to the House of Commons by Sir M. Hicks-Beach, a satisfactory provision made for strengthening both the Navy and Army.