AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14300, 21 February 1910, Page 5

AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE.

' ■ ■■'• ' >■'■'': '■'•:'' : ■'•■' : : .-. ; :' : -' ..'. ' • ■.;'•'X-X: ■'•? , £iX? : Zb>. LORD KITCHENER'S REPORT. ■■'' . '',-' - ■:■."'' .■ :.-' .-' ■' ■"'- : -',;X. 'XXzX ....'■ "., .'■'.■''" -'. ■• "" ■"• ': ■'■' ' * ■':■".,:; •',' ■'''•'. '■! Xf.%-'Xs&] By Telegraph.—Press Aas^tio'rii^3(«^B^ Sydney, February 19* The Sydney "Morning Herald, referring i to. Lord Kitchener's report on Australian defence, says that from every point of J view it is a notable document, completely worthy of the reputation of the great man., responsible for it. He furnishes a direct/.; concise, and entirely , business-like > and' workmanlike <■ statement. When Lord ' Kitchener refers to the possibility of political interference, he places his finger on Australia's weakest spot. _ The Daily Telegraph declares that the report will probably disappoint, expectations! in some basic respects. . "It saya';' nothing," the Telegraph continues, "about equipment, munitions, and mobilisation; it hammers on the life and death significance to us- of Imperial navy predominance, and the petty little mistakenness of;' our attempting to do anything' but' back the/navy up with a well-found Australian land force. Lord' Kitchener gives nothought to the middle distance, years during which we must rest upon the pre- ]X sent voluntary force. It becomes the imperative duty of 'our military advisers tomake _ these forces effective during this transition period." ■■':■ .......