NAVAL NOTES

Otago Witness, Issue 2924, 30 March 1910, Page 33

NAVAL NOTES

(Contributed by the Navy League, Gtago Branch.) FROM 5.75 TO 1805. Our Alfred was the first to plough Foam with an English Fleet: He shaped the keel, he curved the prow, Raised deck, and shroud, and sheet. And, ever since those days of stress, Sea-rovers Britons are. Through Edward, Hanry, stout Queen Bess, From Sluys to Trafalgar. —Alfeed Austin, Poet Laureate, 1909. MEMORABLE DAYS. March 15, 1823, Admiral of the Fleet, Earl St. Vincent, died. Of Jotm <fervis, afterwards Earl St. Vincent, it has been said that he forged the weapon with which Nelson c ought. A strict, harsh, and, some say, cruel disciplinarian ; a man who shrank at nothing an>d who repressed mutiny ruthlessly, St. Vincent was never loved. But his work was necessary, and he was of the stuff of which Empire saviours, if; not builders, are made. He has been termed the lucky commander-in-chier' for whom Nelson won the battle of Cape St. Vincent. Nelson, however, would have none of this, but loyally stQod up ?or the genius, and greatness of his superior. "He is a. com-mander-in-chief able to lead them to glory.". On retiring from active service Lord St. Vincent devoted himself to the reorganisation of the navy administration, which badly needed it. His services were of the highest value, and his name and fame are gratefully remembered. \' ' ■ March 24, 1878, loss of H.M.S.. Eurydice with 318 lives off the coast of -. the Isle of Wight. Rarely in time of peace has England been more deeply moved, , more intensely grieved, more closely touched than were one and 3 all throughout the land on that sad Monday morning of March. 1878, when the breakfast tables anino\inced the awful disaster that the day before had befallen the .training ship Eurydice and all her crew of sailor lads, save two, within sight, practically, of their home port. The dread tragedy was over in a few minutes: — A grey whirl of snow, with the squall at the back of. it, .''■"■' Heeling her, reeling her, beating her down! A gleam of her bends in the thick of the . wrack of it,

A flutter of white in the eddies of brown. It broke in one moment of blizzard and ■'■■■ • blindness, "' The ..next like a foul bat, it flapped on its way; But our ship and our boys! "Gracious Lord,- in Your kindness, v Give help to the mothers who need it : -. to-day! .-.■'•■ • ~ SOME GERMAN OPINIONS. The Berlin, correspondent of The Navy writes under date January 20 that "every Englishman and every German outside the lunatic asylums knows that the German fleet is being built against England just as at present the British fleet is being built against Germany." This, probably is a correct statement, shorn f rhetorical embellishment, of the similar facts of the naval situation. Germany is. building a fleet that shall be second only to that of Great Britain, and . what neither Germany,' nor her apologists have so far done is«to show beyond doubt what this fleet is -for. We cannot 'believe that it is wanted for the protection of her coasts, her colonies, and her commerce, for none or all of these call for the. naval protection that is being prepared. Count von Reventlow may protest against what-soems the common sense interpretation placed upon the preamble to the Navy Act of 1900, and Count Metternich, the German Ambassador at the Court of St. James, may deprecate suspicion, disclaim hostile intent, and assert the peaceful policy of his country, but in the absence of more convincing justification for the stupendous battleship programme to which Germany is committed, Great Britain must answer her challenge in the way she is doing.

A FAMOUS PREAMBLE. j •British advocates .of "Germany's good intentions are equal to explaining away the preamble to the Navy Act. The text of this preamble, as given in the Naval Annual | for 1900 is as follows: Under the existing circumstances, in order to protect Germany's sea trad© and colonies there is one N means only—viz., Germany must have a fleet of such strength that even for the mightiest naval Power a war with her would involve such risks as to jeopardise its own supremacy. For this purpose it is not absolutely ' necessary that the German fleet should be - as strong as that of the greatest Sea Power, because, generally, a great Sea Power would not be in a position to concentrate all its forces against us. But even if it should succeeded in confronting us in superior force, the enemy would be so considerably weakened in overcoming the resistance of a strong German fleet that, notwithstanding a victory gained, the enemy's supremacy would not at first be secured any longer by a sufficient fleet. ~^- In order to attain the proposed aim—viz., the protection of our sea trad© and our colonies by. securing peace with honour, etc. [Then follow the specific proposals about the size of the fleet.] A REMARKABLE INTERPRETATION. Englishmen generally hav© interpreted this statement as meaning that when Germany is " good and ready " she will, if it suits her to do so, challenge British naval supremacy. According to Count Metternich and Count von Reventlow and Sir William White this is an indefensible and unjust interpretation The Manchester Guardian goes much further than this, and roundly accuses the London Times of, being guilty of resorting 'x> the use of garbled/ quotations, because when citing from the preamble it omits the words preceding "viz." The Guardian emphasises the declaration of the preamble that the object of the navy is the protection of Germany's sea trade and colonies, and concludes an ingenious and attractive defence of the pro-German contention, with the following: Germany, had. no ambition in 1900 of competing; with us for supremacy at sea. and ih°i German Ambassador now repeats this dee) a ration for 1910. The only (-hat o?>n +hink of to + he forward an interpretation o" words from

! the act, of 1900 which is not only garblecf and demonstrately false, but historically . impossible. But why answer'/ Why noi ■ simply accept the word of a man of honour? - WHY AN ANSWER IS MADE. ■lit may be asserted • with little nesitanoy that if the Manchester Guardian's touching belief in German official protestations were generally -accepted, arxi ts extraordinary—it certainly is not ordinary—version of the preamble that which is neld by the British Government, there would have been no £50,000,000 set apart 'or thk year's naval estimates. No Government dare accept so facile and convenient an interpretation. Germany 16 not building her great naval armada, one that must be abla to challenge the mightiest naval power, for fun. She may not mean to invade England —if she is wise she will not attempt it : —but she has a policy somewhere —at the Dack of the Kaiser's head possibly—and that policy, sooner or later, in the North Sea, or the Adriatic, will bring her into .sharp opposition to Great Britain. OTHER GERMAN OPINIONS. General Keim, who less than two years ago : was president of the German Navy League, but gave way to Grand Admiral Von, Kcester, owing to the free .and lurid nature of his sentiment, speaking recently at the Jen-a branch of the Navy League, complained that the world "is. no longer listening as it used to do in Bismarck's time Jior the opinion of Berlin.. The impression at home, which is supported by the experience of Germans'abroad; is that German diplomacy is trying to go through the world in felt slippers. The German people, however,' jdo np't pay their ;representatives abroad in "order that Germans may be neglected and squeezed out. People who said that there would be no more wars were lunatics. War would come from antagonv ism of economic interests, and it was England, Germany's industrial rival, who wouldf wage the war. General Keim went on to suggest that the German army was not what it was, and that the German people needed inward regeneration. . There war no nation in the world, he said, that had so little national pride. WHY DENY THE FACTS? attempting to anaiy'se.ithe s£ ;i 1 What startling nature of the.-'geherars \ 1 sentence, it will suffice, here and now\ " | say that what General Keim infers famous journalist, Herr Harden, in Hi* newspaper, the Zu Kumpt, sets dowa with, characteristic bluntness. Apropos of Mr Balfour's Hanley scare speech he wrote: I believe that if I were air Englishman I should think and speak just as Mr Balfour does. He has made his reverence to Germany; he wishes tc avoid war; but he does not want his country ' to be dependent on the goodwill or the illwill of any ether Power, and therefore wishes to open "the eves of the indolent masses as soon as possible to th« danger that is approaching if they will Hot pay a higher premium for the security of their possessions. That aa Anglo-German war is considered in th» Chancelleries of nearly all countries as probable is- true. It is also perfectly true that • there are people in this country who are' of opinion that the. German sword must riddle a.Custom tariff which, would exclude our wares from the whole British Empire. Why do we deny these facts?

On another occasion (in the course of* lecture at ,Posenl the . same journal** said: What,' Germany most needed wae "strong Ministers who would have tn» courage to tackle England" The German people should leave all internal questions for the moment and "direct their, energies against England. '"We are not a, poor -weak nation; we have no need to be so anxious; and have no need t» fight <?h'y of settling matters with sucti * Great Power as,England." •.