NAVAL ARMAMENTS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18159, 2 February 1921, Page 5

NAVAL ARMAMENTS

FUTURE BUILDING PROGRAMME DANGER OF DELAY.

Frees Association—By Telegraph—Copyright,

LONDON, January 30. The Daily Chronicle, in a forecast of the report of <he Sub-committee on Imperial Defence, shows that the controversy which requires immediate settlement is not the question of battleship versus submarine, but whether, in view of the world situation, Britain is strong enough at sea to justify the retarding of her programme of the construction of capital ships until the naval lessons of the war are better understood by all nations.—A. and N.Z. Cable.

BIG AND SMALL SHIPS,

AUSTRALIA REQUIRES BOTH.

MELBOURNE, February 1

Speaking at the Australian Natives’ Association annual banquet. Admiral Grant dealt with the controversy between the supporters of big ships on the one hand and submarines on the other. It was a very attractive policy to choose appar ontly the chief article when considering the question of defence, but he asked the supporters of submarines and airships to take into account the, amount required to keep the Australian coast line of over 12,000 miles secure bv those means. One vital point was always forgotten, and that was the most important one of the protection of trade. Any country which depended on export trade for its wealth and prosperity and on import trade for essentials for industry, must never lose command of the seas. Big and small ships each had their function, and in his opinion the time had not come when any one or two of those classes could succeed completely against a combination of all the others.—Reuter.

WORLD’S NAVAL SITUATION.

, AMERICA’S ATTITUDE

WASHINGTON, January 31. (Received Feb. 1, at 10.50 p.m.) It is understood that the United States General Navy Board, which Mr Daniels (Secretary of War) asked to report on the world naval situation, will strongly op pose any suspension of battleship construe tion. It is stated that the board will also oppose a ‘ naval holiday,”—A. and N.Z