The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 1911. A GREAT SEA LORD.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCIV, Issue 14353, 27 January 1911, Page 4

The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 1911. A GREAT SEA LORD.

When, a little over six years ago, 'Admiral Sir John Fisher, who, the cable states, is now retiring from the service, having fulfilled the span of throe score years and ten, was appointed First Sea Lord, the nation felt that the efficiency of the Fleet of England was entrusted to safe hands. The bluff, down-right, dictatorial seaman had served with credit in every department of the Navy. His practical and theoretical knowledge of its needs and problems was unrivalled, and ho had the reputation of a skilled administrator. A' year ago this month Lord Fisher resigned his high position in the midst of a storm of criticism of Lis policy and its effect upon the Navy, to which ho has not to this day vouchsafed one word of _ reply.; The nation Was by this time divided into two opposing schools of naval opinion, those, led by Lord Charles Beresford, who attaokod Lord Fisher's policy as a policy of dangerous and misdirected economies, and _ those who supported his administration. The revelation, announced in Parliament March 1909, of the extent to which the acceleration of German naval construction menaced British sea supremacy, and the admission that the British authorities had been ignorant of, or liad ignored, some of the circumstances of that acceleration which should have been well known, contributed to the widspread anxiety with which the administration of the Navy was viewed by the opponents of the Fisher policy. It was admitted that Lord Fisher had effected great reforms; to him was due the first construction of the Dread noughts," which altered the whole character of the naval problem, but the extension of the system of nucleus crews and o!her ohnnges in the organisation Mid distribution nf the Fleet were alleged. by hostile critics, to bo inure in the interests of economy limn of 'iffir'.ieui v. An inquiry v, liieh \vn<; held into the condition of (lie Navv by :i committee of llic Cabinet, which reported in .\iigusl 11)0!', resulted in important .-lunmcN of policy being adopted in accordance with suggestions made by Lord Charles llercsford. though it was claimed liv the Admiralty that these changes had been all along intended, and were iinio way inspired by his criticisms. Tn January. 1010, Lord Fisher resigned his tiosition as First Sm

Lord ot' tin- Admiralty, ami was succeeded i>.\" Sir Arthur Wilson, ■who hail held himself aloof iroiu naval controversies, and whose great experience and ability iuepired a |»enorul confidence in hi.s unique fitness for the po.-t. We havo referred t" the criticisms of Lord John Fisher's naval administration. The follow tribute to his achievements was paid by Mr Arnold White at 4 he time v.'hcu he left office, sc.ornins' to reply to critics on hi.s own account: — "In 1904 (when Sir John Fisher took office) a now Navy was required. Tho Fleet nt that date was not ono in which iiuuuery aiul paint struggled for mastery ; paint prevailed. Masts and sails yet lingered ill the Service, and the spirit of masts and sails brooded over the Service Hubs and inspired tho majority of retired naval officers. The Navy was a. rule-of-thumb Navy. The scientific Navy was unborn. So long had tho cankers of a long peace accumulated that nothing less than revolutionary reform was needed, from shipbuilding to breadmaking. from kettles to turbines, from discipline to dockyards, from stratesv to buttons, from Admirals to second-class boys. For so great a task a man was necessary; and a man was found. , . " In a schema Napoleonic m conception and Cromwclliau in thoroughness, revolutionary reform was effected by ono who has not yet been hoard in his own defence. Society was outraged. Every one's shins wero concurrently kicked to splinters. ' Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency.' was Fisher's motto, and he was ruthless, relentless, remorseless, in getting Tlie work is not yet finished. But tho avalanche he launched is alrcadv consolidating into glacier. Continuity of policv reigns. Even common entrv is no longer menaced. After lingering behind or imitating other nations for eighty years, Britain is now ahead and is original. The 1 Dreadnought' suspended European battleship building for Sfteen months, and destroyed the strategic advantage of tho Kiel Canal for eight vears, and gavo Britain a new start in the race for sea supremacy. If Lord Fisher is a born intriguer. he has intrigued for his country. If he is melodramatic, what matter? Playing a lone hand, he has saved the country. This is why I, for cue, gave my humble support to Lord Fisher's policy, in spits of much that I dislike and doubt." It has been said that _ Lord Fisher did not reply to critioism, but one statement which he did make, speaking at a Lord Mayor's banquet in reference to a demapd for a naval inquiry three years ago, contained a defence of Qis policy in terse emphatic words characteristic of the sailor and the man: " Our object," he declared, " has been the fighting efficiency of the Fleet, and its instant readiness for war, and we have got it, and I say it because no one can have a fuller knowledge than mysalf about it, and I Bpeak with the fullest sense of responsibility. So I turn to you all, and I tcin to my countrymen when I say 1 Sleep quietly in your beds and do not be disturbed by mere bogeys—invasions or otherwise—which are being periodically resuscitated by all sorts of leagues.'" It is interesting- to observe that a ■writer in the latest " Portnightly Review," who claims, as the result of an exhaustive analysis of the naval situation, new and old, that the predominance of the British Navy is assured, at least until the spring of 1913, and that " the navy is sound, and deserves the full confidence of the nation," makes this reference to the influence of Lord Fisher. " Three years have passed. The Board of Admiralty has been changed. Admiral-of-the-Fleet Sir Arthur Wilson lias succeeded Lord Fisher as First Sea Lord. What has,been the result? Hardly a comma in any of the latter's far-reaching reforms has been 'altered ; the Fleet is distributed as in 1907; the trade routes are protected as in 1907; the officers and men are being trained as in 1907: the naval organisation at Whitehall Is aa it was left by Lord Fisher The great administrative, executive, and fighting machine has bt*en unaffected by the change in tie person of the officer primarily responsible for the war-readiness of the Fleet " The English " Speotator," which consistently opposed the Fisher policy, does not deny that all this may be true.