TAKEN NEW FORM

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 11784, 21 March 1924, Page 6

TAKEN NEW FORM

NAVAL COMPETITION. i BUILDING LIGHTER SHIPS.. Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. LONDON, March 18. Mr Archibald Hurd, in an article in “The Daily Telegraph,” dissects the fleet comparisons accompanying the Navy Estimates. He points out that naval competition has taken a new form of building lighter vessels useful for attacking commerce. Such vessels building or projected are as follow:-—Britain, 18; United States, 24; Japan, 75; Fiance, 43; Italy, 18; Russia, 34. Mr Hurd agrees that the centre of naval gravity has shifted to the Pacific, where the great fleets of the United States ana Japan are concentrated. The Empire has vital interests there, even if the existence of Australia and New Zealand were ignored, in the light of Britain’s everincreasing commerce in the Pacific. It would be preposterous to suggest further British fleet economies. TO BE PUBLISHED DOMINIONS’ OPINIONS. Australian and N. 7, OeMe \ssociaHon. LONDON, March 19. Mr Macdonald announced that the opinions of the dominions on Singapore would he published. HAMMERING AWAY BRUCE ELABORATES. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. (Received March 21, 1.10 a.m.) MELBOURNE March 20. Speaking at the Federal Government’s luncheon to Admiral Field and the officers of the navy at Parliament House, Mr Bruce elaborated his previous arguments against the abandonment of the Singapore base. LABOUR LEADER’S REPLY TO PRIME MINISTER. MR MASSEY’S REMARKS “RECKLESS AND MISLEADING.” Per Press Association. WESTPORT, March 20. Referring to the cabled announcement that the British Government had definitely decided to abandon the Singapore naval base project, and Mr Massey’s comments thereon, Mr H. E. Holland, M.P., Leader of the Labour Party, 6aid the Imperial Government’s aotion was statesmanlike, making for world peace and therefore strengthening Britain, in the movement towards international relationships. The decision would be welcomed, he was sure, by the vast majority of people of New Zealand and Australia. Mir Massey’s statement that the decision would be a disappointment to all British citizens in the Pacific was as ill-advised as it was reckless and misleading, and was almost as much to be regretted as that Mr Massey should) have allowed his antagonism to the British Labour Government to lead him into the indiscretion of making what was virtually a plea for their defeat by the Conservatives. He insisted that it was no part of the duty of New Zealand’s Prime Minister to use his official position to meddle in political conflicts within Britain.