NAVY OF AMERICA.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19851, 23 January 1928, Page 9

NAVY OF AMERICA.

NEW BUILDING PLAN. GROWTH OF OPPOSITION. OBJECTIONS TO COST. STERN FIGHT INDICATED. MENACE TO WORLD PEACE. By Telegraph—Press Association— Copyright. (Received January 22, 5.5 p.m.) A. and N.Z.-Sun. NEW YORK, Jan. 21. The Washington correspondent of the New York World says the multi-million dollar naval building scheme which the Administration has acquiesced is being inflated so rapidly that it appears destined to be a "billion dollar bubble." Both the Republican and Democrat majorities of the all-powerful Appropriation and Finance Committees have determined to fight to a finish all efforts to appropriate the money necessary to make the naval expansion dream come true. The project, if carried out, would raise the annual cost of the navy to more than £100,000,000 and would increase the annual tax burden by at least £40,000,000. Also it would, in the opinion of many, precipitate, an open armament race between the British and other naval Powers. As the bill now stands the President's hands would be tied even if the limitation of naval armaments should be decided upon at the 1931 conference. Mr. C. Glass, Democrat member of the Senate for Virginia, to-day attacked the programme as "an imposition upon the taxpayers and a menace to world peace." He said it started, apparently, as Administration bluff, and was taken seriously by the Naval Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives. It was causing internatiopal apprehension over the real intention of the United States. Mr. W. E. Borah is opposed to ,the project. He said he intended to attack it as soon as the bill came before the Senate. The Geneva Naval Arms Limitation Conference was described in Congress yesterday by Mr. W. R. Wood, Republican member for Indiana, as a "complete fiasco," because the United States had no ships to scrap or construction work to stop. Mr. Wood" asserted that failure came in spite of "the fact that England might have abandoned further construction of additional cruisers, thus maintaining in greater degree the ratio agreed, upon five years ago." He said the time had arrived "when we must embark upon a* mercantile marine programme that will establish the United States,in the eyes of the world." VIEWS OF LEADERS. ADMIRAL FEARS WAR. COMPETITION IN TRADE. (Received January 22, 10.45 p.m.) A. -and N.Z. NEW YORK, Jan. 21. In a symposium on the naval programme during a public luncheon, Colonel Roosevelt, a son of the former President, said: "We hope for no more wars, but we know they cannot be avoided, -when there is a major-cause like foreign trade, on' which the life of the nation depends. "Arbitration will not hold our prosperity. It now depends upon finding markets abroad for our goods. Ihe speaker demanded a navy equal to Britain's. Admiral C. P. Plunkett said: "lhe penalty for efficiency is war. War is inevitable, so long as we travol along the lines we are travelling on to-day. And what of it? We are not going to leave this heritage of George Washington to luck.'"If I read" history correctly, this country is nearer war than ever before, because its commercial position to-day places us in competition with other great commercial nations. If you do not want war, be a worm and withdraw into the nearest hole in the earth." Mr. A. P. Andrew, Republican member of Congress, said he approved the naval programme, "to support our national policies, which are only reluctantly recognised by other powerful Governments." Mr. F. H. La Guardia, Socialist member of the House of Representatives for New York, attacked the programme on the ground that it meant war, and that other countries were already suspicious of it. ' ,