PATER'S CHATS WITH THE BOYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3292, 18 April 1917, Page 47

PATER'S CHATS WITH THE BOYS.

THE AMERICAN NAVY. Do the United States want a navy? The question is a very live one just now, both to us and to the Americans—l don't like that word used in its narrow sense as a synonym for the inhabitants of the States, but prefer to use it to cover the inhabitants of the two Americas; I suppose, however, we must use it in its narrowed sense, though that is giving the United States folk too much importance. But I asked a question, and flew off at a tangent. In recent years—in the Civil war—the Federals soon found out that the Confederates would inevitably have to surrender because they had no sea power to oppose to that of the Federals, though then, as now, raiders did damage—notably the Alabama, which was fitted out on the Tyne, and got away, and eventually cost us £2,000,000 damages for the supposed harm she did to Federal maritime trade. But apart from raiding, which had no direct effect upon the war, the South could not do anything against the efficient blockade by the North. " The Federal fleet sealed up and starved to death the Southern Confederacy, which had practically no navy, and could not improvise one." THE MONROE DOCTRINE. In my Chats I have to tell you what this doctrine is and how it originated. Suffice it to say just now that it lays down the law that no nation outside the Americas is to acquire territory in the Western World; and twice this doctrine has been in danger of being tested —(a) when we had a dispute with about the boundary line between Vene-' zuela and British Guiana, and (b) Avhen Napoleon 111 (Napoleon the Little he has been called) tried to bolster up Maximilian as King or Emperor of Mexico under Napoleon's suzerainty. In the first case the dispute was settled by arbitration, and in the second Napoleon 111 was persuaded—it didn't take much to do it—to withdraw from the position he had taken up, because at that time America had a fair naval fighting force built up by the Civil war. THE SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR. The Spanish-American ' war and the punishing of the Barbary pirates, however, brought in a new phase. The Monroe Doctrine preached non-interven-tion in the Americas on the part of any European nation —I suppose we can now add Japan,—but also, inferentially, it preached non-intervention on the part- of the United States in waters -outside of the Western Hemisphere. "The SpanishAmerican war, however, has altered the international position ; and no doubt, had Germany been strong enough, seeing she has German colonies in Brazil and Argentina, she would have said that the United States had violated the Monroe Doctrine herself, and that she (Germany) was quite justified in waging a " defensive " war for colonial expansion in the West Indies and South America. And with far more reason than she had to invade Belgium. Here is what an American wrote recently: " To-day our outposts are well nigh as far flung as those of any of the Powers now warring in the Old World. We are in the Philippines, we have assumed a sponsorship for the open door' in China that may be embarrassing ; we hold islands widely scattered in the Pacific; we. have two ocean frontages, on the two greatest oceans, to protect; we have built the Panama Canal, fortified it, and made ourselves responsible before the world for the maintenance of its neutrality and its inviolability. We have vast commercial interests "all over the world, and we are at this very moment aspiring to a large expansion of them." This was .written about two years ago, and is followed further on by this: "In a world in which the crash of empires, the thunder of battle, the tramp of mighty armies, the smoke of combats more awful than ever were dreamed of before—in the world of this day and year, what is the obligation of such a nation as our own towards these instrumentalities to which iT must look for preservation of its place, its peace, its dignity, its part in the councils that must at last end the era of blood-letting and horror?" Now that the United States have come into the conflict and identified themselves with the cause of the Allies, the Monroe Doctrine has become a shadow of its former self, and the States must take their chance in fighting out the world-wide question, Is Might right or Right might? But it is no use to try to settle the question by typing notes. Until the devastating Hun is crushed might has to be used. Can the United States use it? UNSTABLE DEMOCRACIES. Some- months ago I gave two or three Chats on a long article in one of the reviews, the article being entitled "The Iron Broom of War." One of the objects of the article was to show that, in the past, democracies had been short-lived because there was no continuity of policy. Pan-Germanism has been a steady growth of 40 or more years, but then the shaping of the policy has been in the hands of a few who have definite objects in view —objects which, at times, may seem to have been almost submerged, but w r hich are never lost sight of. With a democracy, however, things are different, and the United States have not been the exception. "By fits and spurts, caused by departmental dependence upon legislative caprice, our new navy has been developing down to the present day. We have never had anything like a continuing naval programme. No Congress can bind its successors for a long enough future to make it possible to adopt and carry to execution a great scheme of systematic naval development, like the German and English naval programmes, which have given these countries their splendid modern fleets."

•Congress recognised its limitations, and created a "General Board of the Navy," which set to work "upon framing plana for the development of a fitting force, and for the maintenance of a, proper co-ordi-nation and correlation among all its parts and divisions." At the head of this board was Admiral Dewey, the hero of Manila, who died about three months ago. A well-thought-out scheme was placed before Congress > but nothing came of it, and the patchwork system, or want of system, "has resulted in an ill-balanced and unsatisfactory establishment." In 1915 President Wilson approved of a scheme covering a building programme of five years—l9ls-1920,—and this is being proceeded with. But 1920! Is the war to last -until then? If so, and if the Germans come out on top; are they going to wait until the scheme becomes* an accomplished fact? At present, the fleet and its accessories are woefully deficient. In 1920, though perhaps the speed of building and equipping have been accelerated, there will be two battlecruisers of 40,000 tons, 35 knots, eight 14in (?) guns; two battleships, 36,000 tons, 21 knots, eight 16in guns, and 20 6in (?) —the queries indicate that exact details are not available. Next year there ought to be completed—perhaps, too, they "have been hastened on—two more battleships as above, but with 22 sin guns instead of the probable 20 6in on the later ones. And so on down the scale. That programme totals £100,000,000. the battleships running into £3,760,000; battlecruisers, £3,500,000; and scout-cruisera, £1,000,000 each. It isn't so very long ago when £1,000,000 was looked upon, as a terrific sum for a worship; but now, as estimates are almost invariably exceeded, I suppose that, especially with the present high prices of materials, the battleships will run into £5,000,000.' "As usual, a column doesn't contain all I have to say. But just one more word: How will America coming in affect us? That would mean a Chat in itself to answer. Briefly (a) our naval forces watching for interned vessels trying td escape will be set free for other work; (b) America will probably do her own convoying, and that will be another relief} (c) "interned German ships will be put Into commission and help to relieve the shortage of shipping; (d) America coming in will increase the effectiveness of the blockade and lessen supplies to neutrala adjacent to Germany; and (e) the moral effect on nexitrala will be in our favour, and the depressing effect upon Germany will be in our favour, too. But also remember that the United States will have to do much patrolling to defend her coasts.' I think there are to be some illustra* tions of American battleships and cruisers in this week's Witness. Notice the net* work masts. The main idea if this style of construction is, I think, to let shot and shell thrqugh with less risk of bringing the structure down.