DOES BRITAIN RULE THE WAVES P

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4425, 3 August 1901, Page 4

DOES BRITAIN RULE THE WAVES P

One of the heaviest indictments yet penned against the naval authorities of Great Britain is. contained in an article contributed by Mr Arnold White to the July number of the “National Review.” In the first part, of his able paper, Mr White tells how brightly the fires of patriotism burn in the fleet, and upbraids the nation for the complacency it manifests towards the British Navy, which it regards as everywhere supreme. The British peo* pie have such implicit and absolute faith in the readiness of the Navy for war at a day’s notice that even the South African war has not really stirred them. Mr White characterises the attitude of 'the masses and classes in relation to the vital interests of the nation as “languid indifference.” They care not for parties, politics or partial xneivts, because they are persuaded that the. Navy will see them through anything that will turn up on the hither side of the Judgment Day. Britain’s splendid isolation, the writer tells us, is a tribute that Vbters pay to the Navy, because they remember the Nile and Trafalgar. They sing “Britain rules the waves,” and flatter themselves that one Englishman is equal to three Frenchmen. And so, concludes Mr White, they go on buying and selling, eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, as in the days of Noah, “and knew not until the flood came and took them all away.” This is . all very striking and picturesque, but is it correct? Do the facts regarding the British Navy justify anyone making such assertions? As he proceeds 1 Mr Arnold White increases in boldness. “Nowhere,” he asseverates, “is the British Navy strong; everywhere it is weak.” ' The China squadron is outnumbered. In the Mediterranean, Admiral Fisher’s ten battle, ships are confronted by fourteen French vessels of the same class, while Russia has one in the Levant and nine in the Black Sea. The allocation of Brri tain’s fleet among the various stations ie such that it is supreme nowhere: everywhere it is weak or outmatched. Notwithstanding the apparent pessimistic tone of his contribution, Mr Arnold White is probably doing his country good service in directing attention to the weakness of t h e Navy in some quarters and of endeavouring to quicken public opinion to a livelier realisation of the truth that on the Navy hang the peace, security and commercial pros* perity of the Empire. If the Australian Squadron is weak, it is to our interest in this colony that it should, be strengthened. When the Boer war broke out, all the world knows Great Britain was not prepared for the at* tack. Lord Lansdowno himself has as* serted that “the country was not ready for war and the British Cabinet contented itself with taking those measures which it was advised were sufficient to ensure the safety of the colonies.” The fact that we now know how made* quate those measures were, and how ill* informed the Intelligence Department of the War Office was, enables Mr Arnold White, with all the knowledge he possesses of naval affairs, to point a ■moral by directing public attention to the “weak spots" of the British fleet. The Mediterranean squadron is his chief concern, and his paper is mainly directed to showing how necessary it is to provide for its reinforcement. He dwells upon the ambitions cl France and Russia, and gives point and significance to the recent visit of the First Lord ,of the Admiralty and his colleagues to Malta during the session of Parliament. He deals in detail with the inefficiency of the Mediterranean squadron, and urges the British people not to rely so much upon the friendli* ness of Russia and France as upon the readiness for war of “our great fighting fleet.” But Mr White asserts that we no longer possess the supremacy of the sea, because our ships are stinted of material; and strength is not concentrated where it is l most required. He shows bow dependent Great Britain is for existence upon her ships of war, and declares that every million spent upon the Army above twenty-four mil* lions a year is taken from the Navy, since that Army could not move from one place to another unless the Navy commanded the sea. , All this is what some may describe as the scream of an alarmist, but Mr White does not stand alone. Another authority informs ns that it will require sixty-two torpedo destroyers to ensure the safety of the Mediterranean squadron, and these vessels cannot be found with the same rapidity.as army corps and colonial con= tingents can be raised and despatched to a seat of war. With the Mediterranean fleet at its present strength

the temptation to France is almost irre* sistible, and it might happen that the combined fleets of France and Russia would "bottle up” Admiral Fisher as effectually as General White was hem* med in by Joubert and Botha. It is said that every vice-admiral, rear-admiral and posUcaptain in the Navy knows its comparative weakness, and if they could speak would tell John Bull how necessary it is to maintain its efficiency, for a strong British fleet is the surest guarantee for the peace not only of Europe, but cf the world, A powerful fleet is also necessary as a protection to British commerce. Without it the working man at Homo would find his daily occupation gone, and his children crying for bread at halfcii-crown a loaf, while the people of this and other colonies might find themselves laid under levy by their country’s enemies. Let, therefore, the Navy bo strengthened. If ships are ancient and their armaments obsolete, let the nation arouse itself from its torpor and demand that Cabinet Ministers shall render the British Navy at least super* ior to the combined fleets of any two Powers in strength, equipment and efficiency. If such an essay as Mr White’s helps to attain that end, it will not have been penned in vain.