THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, JULY 29, 1910. NAVAL ARMAMENTS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14898, 29 July 1910, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, JULY 29, 1910. NAVAL ARMAMENTS.

Rkcest cablegrams relating to the ■ burning question of the increase of naval armaments do not show that a problem the magnitude of which is recognised by the nations lias been reduced to terms a whit more favourable to its solution. At the heart of tho Empire the conflict of opinion as to the efficiency of tjie first line of British defence still -wages unremittingly as was quite to be expected since the navy was dragged into the arena of party politics.- And as bajs been the case for eome considerable time past, almost every .argument advanced on the subject lias some reference to the naval programme of Germany. Germany, in sliort, continues to set the paco in naval construction, the nations spend hundreds of millions annually upon the machinery of destruction, and Great Britain, having the greatest Empire to defend, must perforce keep the lead. In Germany, as in England, newspaper opinion goes from one extreme to the other in" discussing the question, and, is not very helpful, while there is always the suspicion that it may have received official inspiration. It certainly appears, however, as- if the important utterances of the Prime Minister ir the House of Commons in reply to Mr Dillon's motion for the reduction of the shipbuilding vote had made a favourable general impression across tile North Sea, and as if they had not been altogether denied the possession of tho genuine ring vbich they have in iro-

partial ears. Mr Asquitb's figures regarding tho comparative strength of Great Britain and Germany in capital ships two and three years hence have elicited a statement from tho German Admiralty reducing his estimate rather substantially cm tho German side. In this connection, however, the Daily Mail's Berlin correspondent remarks that " there is no reason for supposing that the navy officials will abandon their preposterous attempts to conceal the facts regarding the rate of construction." Another correspondent reiterates his statement that Germany, under a veil of secrecy, is creating a huge fleet of submarine®, and with the Opposition in tho House of Commons protesting that the margin between tho respective armaments of the two Powers is insufficient, with tlie presentation to the Government by the Imperial Maritime League of a memorial extensively signed by distinguished soldiers and sailors asking that a- loan of a hundred. millions may be sanctioned to ensure the national safety, and- with Lord Charles Beresford advocating a loan of somewhat more modest but still heavy dimensions' so that as many as twelve Dreadnoughts may be laid down next year, there seems 110 particular fear that a false sense of security concerning the real position has any prospect of gaining ground at Home.

The relations between Great Britain and Germany, Mr Asquith assured' the House of Commons a few days ago, " had bsen and were most cordial, and he anticipated a constantly-increasing warmth and fervour therein," The Prime Minister's statement ■ further suggests that, but for the' German Navy Law, representations made by the Imperial Government to Germany with a view to the reduction of shipbuilding might have come to something, In Germany, again, we read of resentment on the part of a large section of the press at the attempt to saddle the public with the responsibility of rejecting British overtures', the allegation, which is no doubt the correct one, being that the naval programme is enforced by the war parties for the satisfaction of their own ambitions. It seems unreasonable to suppose that the German people as a whole would not regard with satisfaction the notion of the greatest sea-power in the world extending her hand to Germany with a view to the limitation of armaments, seeing that they realise the bnrden of cost which the naval policy of thoir own Government imposes upon them.. One German journal, commenting on Mr Asquith's speech, goes so far as to say that the Government need only give the initiative and it will find a, majority in tho Reichstag in favour of a limitation of naval armaments, "and other journals adopt a, similar toue. Tlie' Wiener Tagebkitt, which is in close touch .-with the German Foreign Office, has inferred, and apparently in no hostile spirit, that Mr Asquith is considering the possibility of an understanding with Germany, "and within the last day or two the Yossische Zeitung has hinted at' tho possibility of the limitation of armaments in the near future. Dissentient notes, of course, ihavo been sounded in criticism of Mr Asquith's utterances, and on British soil these have been particularly concerned with the interpretation of " an ample margin of security against all probable and even possible risks''—an ideal',to the maintenance of which the Liberal Government professes itself devoted. The opinion of Lord Brassey on matters relating to the , navy i-i deservedly respected. Speaking in public some months .ago on the subject ho said: "We have reviewed the position.' We have seen that as ive stand to-day our naval supremacy is, fully assured. We have to maintain that position by further efforts, The resources of Great 'Britain are immense: in relation to the' demands of the navy they may be described as inexhaustible. Speaking as an old parliamentary hand, I confidently give the assurance that the British Empire will never be lelt without naval defence through the refusal of Parliament to vote tlie necessary supplies." Less comforting is the argument of another naval authority, Captain Mahan, that "the disquieting features of the situation are the apparent indisposition and slackness of the new voters oi Great Britain aa contrasted with ( the resolute spirit' and tremendous faculty for organising their strength that is evident in Germany.'" The indications seem somewhat more favourable just now than at any time in the past few years to the prospect of the adoption of an international agreement to curtail the expenditure on implements of destruction, but the probability of the attainment of such an end will not be strengthened by the manifestation in Great Britain of any spirit other than a determination that the national security must be in no sense imperilled.