THE TOY NAVY

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8740, 23 May 1914, Page 7

THE TOY NAVY

A'HAT THE FARMERS THIWW OF IT !i BRITISH ADMIRALTY THE BEST JUDGE. AUCKLAND, May 22. The question of naval defence Was discussed at some length at the Farmer’s Union Conference yesterday, when tho provincial executive submitted tho following remit: —“That this conference, while re-affirming the position that New Zealand should contribute its fair share towards the deJ (fence of the Empire, is of opinion !that tho proposed change of policy in (regard to the naval subsidy is such an all-important matter, and fraught (with such serious and far-reaching results, that the Dominion should not .finally he committed until the matter ! has been more fully discussed.” Mr A. A. Ross, in introducing the subject, expressed the opinion that it had not been given proper eonsidcration by tho people of New Zealand.Ho deprecated the tendency to make it a party question, and suggested that tho effect of this would he to show the Dominion up to tho world as » bouse divided against itself on a matter upon which New Zealanders should be unanimous. (Hear, hear.) Hitherto tho policy had been to make a' direct contribution to the British Navy, but a complete reversal of that policy was now suggested, and the only reason given was that it had faded to carry out portion of an agreement to maintain a fleet in the Pacific. “I feel,” said the speaker, “that far too much is being made out of this cry, because we really should not expect the British Admiralty to make an agreement that would be binding.” (Applause.) Mr Ross went! on to remark that the state of affairs) in Europe at the present time was such as rendered a critical position likely, and the men at the heart of the Empire were competent to know 1

where the navy was most wanted* [That being so, w© in New Zealand, should not question their decision ifl. •tho slightest. (Hear, hear.) Another 1 reason for advocating a local navy was (that foreign nations might send their (forces into these waters, when our pro■perty would be absolutely liable to destruction. Experts were quit© satis--1 field that it was no us© thinking that,| (even in combination with Australia,, Iwe could sot up a navy equal to thej [protection of the Pacific against the iiaval force of Japan. He (the speaks or) did not think that there was any (danger at present, hut the fact should not bo overlooked that the British colonies wore adojifing a policy which 'must bo repulsive to Japan. and therefore it was not unlikely that that nation would accept tm opening to come down to Australian waters. No' .foreign nation was likely to attack the (British Navy unless there was a good chance of success, and therefore it was wisest for New Zealand to help In keeping the Imperial Navy at full 'strength. (Applause.) Oaptain Colbock endorsed the opinion that the British Admiralty wore far better judges ch the Imperial position than were the people of Now Zealand. The Admiralty said that the storm centre just now was in the Baltic and the North Sea, and therefor© it was only reasonable to expeot that, those seas should be guarded more closely than the Pacific for the time being. A few years ago franco was the enemy, and it might bo only a few years before the Pacific was the storm centre, in ’which case the fleet would be strengthened in this direction. If there was to bo any change of policy, the speaker thought it should bo in the direction of increasing our contribution to the British Navy. At present we in New Zealand were contributing only 2s per head to the defence fund, as compared with a contribution ,of £1 per head, by British taxpayers. He (the speaker) claimed that we were as much concerned as they in the supremacy of the British Navy, for where would our meat, our wool, and our butter he if that supremacy was lost. A contribution of 10s per head (equivalent to £500,000) was the least we should pay towards naval defence. The speaker also urged that the navy should be made our first lin© of defence, instead of the territorial forces as at present. 'they were 1 spending £IOO,OOO per year on naval defence, and £495,000 per year on land defence. He contended that those figures should be reversed. The speaker concluded by declaring that the outcry for a local navy was largely the outcome of on insane desire on the part of some of our colonists to have navfil officers at their house parties and dances, and on the part of certain shopkeepers to secure the business of naval forces. (Laughter and applause.)