The British Navy

Temuka Leader, Issue 5794, 23 March 1909, Page 4

The British Navy

IMMEDIATE STRENGTHEN. IMPERATIVE, GREAT EXCITEMENT AT HOME, SERIOUS POSITION. LONDON, March 17.

The House of Commons was crowded on the occasion of Mr Reginald McKenna, First Lord of the Admiralty, introducing the Navy Estimates.

Mr McKenna admitted that the estimates required the strongest justitica- | tion from a Government which was pledged to peace, retrenchment, and reform ; but the limits of tho British Navy were fixed by other Powers. Germany was so hastening her shipbuilding that thirteen Dreadnoughts instead of nine would be completed in 1911. Britain would then have sixteen, but it was possible that Germany would compJete four more by April, 1912. Thus came th c necessity for Britain ordering g*is and armour 'to enable her to complete four extra by March, 1912. Mr McKenna went on to say that in 1907 only two ships in the German Navy were capable Dreadnoughts ; now there were fourteen and three, in course of construction. Moreover, Krupps and other firms wero now able to supply the component parts .of eight ships in a single year. The resources of British linns were taxed to retain the supremacy in rapidity and volume of construction. The Dreadnought-Invincible types were not the only vessels. In case of war it.would be impossible to recall cruisers from foreign service, they being neccsstiry to keep open the highways of the sea. The lifo of ships of King Edward VII. and other formidable types of vessels had been shortened, though they were not obsolete.

Mr Balfour, Leader of the Opposition, emphasised ; the fact that e'ermany had laid down eight Dreadnoughts in PJOS, and quoted the Minister of Marine's statement in the Reichstag—"'We can build as fast as the English." Assuming; this to be true, in December, 1910, Britain would have ten Dreadnoughts, Germany thirteen ; in July, 1911, Britain would have fourteen, Germany seventeen. 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 Britain's waters was a Power with a capacity and a will to compete with Britain's Navy. The Government's pro"Tamme was utterly insufficient. Mr Balfour asked the House to adopt a resolution, not for a two-power standard, which was beyond question, lmt a one-power standard in ships of the 'first class, which sieemed to Ibo slipping- from Britain's grasp. j The Prime Minister, Mr Asquith, !in replying- to Mr Balfour, admitted that the hypothesis upon which the last naval programme was; based had been falsified 'with events. The Government were greatly spirited in November to learn that Germany was hastening the construction of ; four Dreadnoughts. It was now found to be untrue • that Germany would take thirty months to build a ship, Britain would take twenty-four. There had been such an enormous development of shipping in Germany, and provision for gun mountings, turrets, and arniaiments, that Britain no longer held the advantage In dealing with Mr Bal- ' four's estimates, Mr Asquitli stated that Germany had given an explicit and most distinct declaration that she does not intend to further 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 would |be carried out. There was no I possibility of an arrangement with Germany lor a mutual reduction of armament. Ell'orts in that direction had been made and failed. : li Germany accelerated her building, Brituiu would have time during the year to make provision to meet it. Jn replying to Mr Balfour, Mr MeKenmi stated that he believed that only material and armaments were being collected for two of the lour Dreadnought*, the construction of which it was proposed to hasten. Both ALr Balfour and Mr Vs'piith regretted the necessity for making comparisons with Germany, i-nd insisted that they did not imply ilat the relations between Britain and Germany- were strained. EON-DON .March In.

•Replying to a question in the House of Commons, tho Bight Hon. R. McKenna, First Lord of tho Admiralty admitted that there was no plant for making gun mountings at \VooKvich. Great Britain had, ho said, seventeen

slips, whilo two others were capable of adoption for warship purposes.

Though .Mr Frederick Harrison, the leader of the PosiUvists, is opposed to all forms of militarism, he warmly supports in the Times every possible precaution on sea and land ngei Germany. March ID. In the House of, Commons, Mr Austen Chamberlain continued tho naval debate. lie said that Ministers had been living in a fool's paradise. A year ago they had no security that their judgment was Ix'ttor than it was now, and in any case the margin had been dangerously narrow. They had been forgetful of such a contingency as a shipbuilding strike.

Mr Chamberlain and Mr Bonar Law insisted that it was essential to lay down the Dreadnoughts promised for April immediately. Mr McKenna said that the coming battleships would be .'HI per cent, better than the Dreadnoughts. Mr Balfour, noticing that Mr McKenna avoided a direct promise that four Dreadnoughts would be laid down in April, taxed Mr Asiputh, who promised this if the acceleration o! the German programme were continued. . SYDNFY-, March 1«.».

Public men take a serious view' of the na\'nl situation as disclosed by Mr .MeKenna's statement and its bearing on Australia. The Federal Premier. Mr Fisher, stales (hat. at the Premiers' Conference he i\ri'\\- the attention of (hose present to the state of Kuropcan politics, and pointed out thai the danger of invasion might demand that the whole of the resources of the country should be used.

Tlu- Daily Telegraph suites (s that in tin' event of tin' tension over the naval situation becomim:' sharper, Australia and Canada, as tin- leaders amongst the Colonial countries, should carl) ol'l'rr the Admiralty the cos! of a Dreadnought. "What a significant intimation." it adds, "it would lie to other nations that these comparatively rich yniin L ' dominions would l>e tiiiiflc <o reinforce the .Motherland for :"iv cmei'i'iMicy." The cost would l>e relativelv small, and the foi-f f lh>: example would he tremendous, UI'.UI.IN. March 1-'. The naval debate In the liriti-h House of Commons aroused eival interest in Connany. The press, how-

ever, are sparing in comment. Tho Neuste Nachrichten, the organ of the Navy League, is incensed at Germany informing Great Britain that she does not intend to hasten her rate of naval construction, and characterises the supplying of this information as regrettable weakness. ; Admiral von Tirpitz, Minister for the Navy, in a speech in the Reichstag, stated that in 'the autumn of 1912, Germany would have only 13 Dreadnoughts and Invincibles. Ho did not know on what grounds Mr Reginald McKenna, First Lord of the British Admiralty, had arrived at a [ larger figure. No proposal for disarmament had been made to Uermany. LONDON, March 19. Tho. Standard's Berlin correspondent reports. that Mr Asqtiith's statement that the Admiralty had ascertained what had happened almost immediately after the German battleships were begun, created an unpleasant surprise among the German authorities, who had no idea their secrets wero so inefficiently guarded. Elaborate precautions had been taken to conceal the extent of the German shipbuilding operations. > A number of Peers and memljers of the House of Commons have signed a requisition asking Mr Asquith for an inciuiry into the administration of the Admiralty. March 20.

In the House of Commons, Mr Balfour gave notice of a motion of cen'sure on tho ground that the imniediato provision of battleships of the newest typo proposed by the Government • is insufficient to secure the safety of tho Empire. The Cabinet held a meeting last night, lasting two aud a half hours, ,to consider the developments in connection with the naval situation. Admiral C. E. Penrose Fitzgerald angrily demands wha/t the Navy Intelligence Department has been doing to be unaware of Germany's spurt till months too late. Admiral Kennedy advocates building two vessels to s every one built by Gertmany. "If we spend live millions," he says, > "it is a fleabite compared with invasion." Many political meetings in the provinces demanded the immediate construction of Dreadnoughts only if Germany accelerates her building. Many Ministerialist speeches have been delivered in the provinces. Mr Runciman declared that it would be folly to build many years ahead. He regretted the construction of the first Dreadnought. ; Tho Master of Ebbank said the first Dreadnought had led to a wild competition. The ■ Conservatives must bear the blame for this ; nevertheless the Liberals were determined to maintain the superiority of tho nayy at all costs. Sir E. P. Trevelyan said the country was on the verge of a panic, stimulated by exaggeration. Colonel Seely pointed out that if the Dreadnoughts were beaten we still have other war vessels. The Spectator declares that England has been living in a naval fool's paradise. Many ne\vspai>ers suggest that Britain should purchase Brazil's three Dreadnoughts now being completed at Klswiek and Barrow.

.Naval experts assert that tho present is an exceptionally • opportune time for laying down new ships, material being cheap, and in 'view of the prevalent unemployment, several groat linns would be glad to keep their plant running and their workmen together for the smullest margin of profit. Berlin papers publish details of night and day work in the extension of Wilhelmshaven, and declare that within a few months it will supersede Kiel. All the Dreadnoughts ami Invineibles under construction will be stationed at Wilhelmshaven. Count Itoventlow, naval expert states that 'Mr Asquilh is in error regarding (Jei'niany's assurance that she woukl not accelerate construction. He boasts that .Germany's shipbuilding is capable- of more rapid progress. Prince Buelow and Ilerr von Schoen (Foreign Affairs) refused to attend a Budget Committee meeting, the members demanding an explanation of the discrepancies between Admiral Tirpil/.'s and Mr McKenna's statements, regarding (li-i-iiiitiiy s rate of construction. Canadian and Capo Colony newspapers are impressed with the gravity of the naval disclosures. MKLBOUUNF, March 21. .Melbourne newspapers support a suggestion that in view of the acute naval position, Australia should present the Imperial Government with a Dreadnought. Mr Fisher states that j the I'ederal Government quite appreciate the idea, though ho does not desire to express an opinion upon it. He added that all the resources of the Commonwealth would, bo at the disposal of the Imperial authorities in a case of difficulty with miv Bower. The -Minister of Defence, inferring to the naval crisis, said it was the I most serious situation British statesmen had had to face since the last century. tSYDNFY, March i»l. The suggested presentation of a 'Dreadnought meets with general support in Sydney. .Politicians, however, while sympathetic, are reticent, realising the financial problems involved. In .Melbourne newspapers the suggestion of presenting a Dreadnought meets with strong and general support. <;,■ An enthusiastic meeting of the .Stock I'Achnngc carried a resolution asking that Parliament be called together to authorise the building of a gift Dreadnought.

l.ord I)u(Hi■ v and many pulilie men have evpressed approval of tllo presentation, and teh'eranis from other States indicate a .similar feeline- there. LONDON. March •_'(). The Times says that the sum_rcstjou of the Melbourne papers (hat Australia -diould present a Dreadnought (~ the Imperial (loverument would lie welcomed in the spirit prompting it, as an evidence of the .solidarity of the Mritish rair. "Although Knelnnd must he prepared to maintain her supremacy in the North Sea ahm,., we count upon our Dominions taking a share in the necessities in almost every sea."