BRITISH POLITICS.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9397, 18 March 1909, Page 5

BRITISH POLITICS.

r't'. ' , •—, ,• 7 ■ ' NAVAL ESTIMATES. United Press Association— By Electric Telegraph —Copyright. ' London, March 17. The House of Commons was crowded on the occasion of Mr R. McKenna, First Lord of the Admiralty, introducing the naval estimates. This was due to the disquieting effect caused hy Mr Balfour’s detached non-party criticisms and Mr Asquith’s grave admissions, intensified by the attitude of the majority of the Seduction of Armaments Committee, and the fact that the Labour Party had been shaken in their resolve to vote against the. increase. % Mr McKenna admitted that toe estimates required the strongest justification from a Government pledged to'peaoe, retrenchment and reform, but the limits of the British Navy were fixed by the other Powers. Germany was so hastening her shipbuilding that thirteen Drea : noughts instead of nine would be completed in 1911. Britain wonld then have sixteen, bnt it was possible that Germany would complete four more by - April, 1913. Thus the necessity might arise for Britain ordering guns and armour to enable her to complete four extra ships by |Maroh, 1913. Mr McKenna said that in 1907; only two ships in the German navy were capable of being called Dreadnoughts, now there were 14, and o course ”of construction. Moreover. Krnpps and other firms were now able to supply the component parts of eight battleships in a single year. The resources of British firms were taxed to retain supremacy in rapidity and volume of construction. The Dreadnought and Invincible types were not the only vessels, but in case of war it would be impossible to recall cruisers from foreign service, they being necessary to keep open the highways of sea life. The life of the King Edward VII. and Formidable types of vessels had been shortened, though they were not obsolete. Mr Balfonr emphasised the fact that Germany laid down eight Dreadnoughts in 1908. He quoted the Minister of Marine’s statement in the Reichstag, “We can build as fast as the English.” Assuming that this was true, in December, 1910 Britain would have ten Dreadnoughts and Germany thirteen. In July, 1911, Britain would have 14 and Germany 17. For the first time in modern history, Britain was facing a situation so new and dangerous that it was difficult to realise all its import. Bordering our waters was a Power With a capacity and will to compete with our navy. The Government programme was utterly insufficient. He asfeied the House to adopt a resolution not for a two-Power standard, which was beyond question, bat a ona-Power standard in ships of the first-class, which seemed to be slipping from our grasp. M»* Asquith, in replying, admitted that the hypotheses upon x which the last naval programme was based had been falsified by events. The Government was greatly surprised in November to learn that Germany was hastening the construction of four Dreadnoughts. It was now untrue that Germany would take thirty months-to build a ship which Britain bad taken twenty-four months to build. There had been such enormous development in slips for shipping in Germany and provision for gun moan ting, turrets, and armaments, that Britain no longer held the advantage. Mr Asquith continued by dealing with Mr Balfour’s estimates. He stated that Germany had given an explicit and most distinct declaration that she did not intend farther to accelerate her naval programme. Though this was not a pledge in the sense of an agreement, and it was impossible to put it before Parliament, the Government programme was based upon the assumption that the declaration was to he carried out. There was no possibility of an arrangement with Germany for mntnal reduction. Efforts in that direction bad been made bnt had failed. “If Germany accelerates shipbnflding,” said Mr Asquith, “We have time during the year to make necesasry provison for replying.”

In reply to Mr Balfour, Mr McKenna stated that he believed that material and armaments had been collected for only two of the four Dreadnoughts, the construction of which Germany proposed to hasten. Replying to Mi Balfour Mr Asquith regretted the necessity for comparisons With Germany, and insisted that they did not imply that the relations between Britain and Germany were strained. PRESS OPINION. A SERIOUS SITUATION. Received March 18, 8.30 a.m. London, March 17. The Navy Debate has oieated a profound sensation throughout the country. The Daily News reluctantly supports the Estimates and argues that the entente between Britain, France and Russia dominates the European situation and explains Germany’s fears. Meanwhile this disastrous competition means to Britain an increase of taxation and possibly the beggaring of social reform. The Chronicle declares that the Question is no longer whether Ministers are justified in [proposing so

much expenditure but rather whether they are justified in not proposing more.

The Times notes Mr Asquith’s renewed pledge and hints that this may ulimately entail enlarging the present estimates. It adds “German dockyards and factories are working night and day, and the Government in some cases is paying 35 per cent; above the original estimates.”

The Westminster.' Gazette says Government’s frank, statement with regard to Germany’s acceleration in building will ensure unanimity among its supporters. The Pall Mall Gazette says Austria is laying down a Dreadnought. Austria’s navy in the future must te reckoned as part of the German navy.