EMPIRE DEFENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3655, 1 April 1924, Page 32

EMPIRE DEFENCE.

THE NAVY’S PART. WELLINGTON, March 25. At the Federal Government banquet on Thursday last Vice-Admiral Field received a remarkable ovation on rising to respond. He said that all men who were students of history, and who had thought out the lessons of the war, did not need to be reminded of the question of the sea power of the Empire, and still less did he feel it incumbent upon him to labour this question in Australia in these days which were so difficult for all the Governments, when the need for economy was so urgent, and when the calls were so great in other directions for expenditure in improving houses and the education of the people. Ihe Governments which were hard pressed were apt to lose their sense of proportion and to forget that the improvement in living and education, and the well-being of the people depended upon the integrity of the Empire. People with no responsibility had said that the navy was no longer necessary, as it had been superseded by the submarine and the aeroplane. Perhaps it would lie not wasting time if he endeavoured to clear up some of those fallacies. Supposing, for instance, that for economy’s sake a country decided to have only submarines. It. was a very easy matter to design a special craft for dealing only with submarines. A small, light draught, high speed vessel, with the latest submarine detecting appliances and destructive apparatus, was not difficult or expensive to design. The answer to the submarine would be myriads of those small, cheap craft, which would give the submarine a hot time, and if she got out of a harbour she would be lucky to get back. The answer to this antisubmarine craft would be a. vessel a little larger and stronger, and so it would go on until they reached the most powerful service vessel —the capital ship. He did not maintain tnat capital ships would always be of the same design. Designs, like fashions, changed frequently.—(Laughter.) pealing with aircraft, Vice-Admiral Field said that at present aircraft had an effective radius of about 2000 miles. Their importance was very eat, and wag increasing, but in the British Empire, where our trade routes sometimes were 10,000 miles lor.g, they could not übc aircraft in place oi’ a battle cruiser. Therefore they could not stj in the next 20 years the possibility of aircraft taking the place of oruisers in the protection of our trade routes. lie was not detracting from the importance of aircraft —they were necessary. Naval warfare became more and more complicated, and the navy required all these special means of defence to carry out its proper functions if the Empire were to be defended. He had heard it said that the next war would be decided by Great Britain being bombed into submission in a week. The answer, perhaps, was not for the navy to give, but he would say that the proper way to prevent that would be to build up an air force to prevent it. But the building up of an air force would not prevent Great Britain from being starved into submission if her trade routes were assailed.—(Applause.) "Vice-Admiral Field proceeded: “The provision of cruisers to protect the trade routes is the most important way to assist. Australia’s cruiser squadron lies already done good work, but the life of a cruiser is at most 15 years, and your cruisers are coming to the end of their life. Earnestly I ask you to consider their replacement by a modern type that can protect the trade routes. I know it is not the time to ask for expenditure more than you can afford, but you must earnestly consider this. The next best way to help is for you to consider the construction of one or more oversea, patrol submarines. The overseas patrol submarine is very valuable for threatening the communications of an enmy and scouting in the presence of superior forces. You might thus give valuable service in hampering an enemy fleet and allowing the Home fleet to get out before things have gone too far.”

Referring to the question of the Singapore base, Vive-Admiral Field said that Mr Bruce had obliginglv left him a loophole by which he could escape mention of it, and he would only sav that it was the Government’s decided policy, and this decision had not been made without consultation with the Board of Admiralty, which was far more competent than he to deal with the question. Reverting to Australia’s part in naval defence, Sir Frederick Field said that Australia should consider the establishment of a base somewhere in the north-west to enable the cruisers protecting the trade routes to take in fuel without having to go too far. Port Darwin must have been placed there by Providence. It could not nave been in a better place. If Australia were going to replace her cruisers she must make improvements in the repair bases at Sidney so that they would be able to deal with the vessels as soon as they were constructed. In regard to improvements all round the coast in these harbours, with very little additional expense, the commonwealth would ensure that the bases and jetties would be suitable for her warships, as well as for other shipping. At the conclusion of his speech all the guests rose and heartily cheered Sir Frederick Field.