NAVAL NOTES.

West Coast Times, 12 April 1912, Page 4

NAVAL NOTES.

In what other country in tho world with pretensions to rank amongst the Great Powers, would tho children in the elementary schools be loft untaught on the subject of sea power and Hie

navy ? To tho British toll sea is everything. ' The ocean, besides being the means of communication, is also a barrier. Whoever wins command of tho sea opens communication for himself, and shuts that door against his enemy. The object of naval warfare is tho control of communications, not the annexation of territory.—Arnold White on Julian Corbett’s ‘ Some Principles of Maritime Strategy.’ MR CHURCHILL’S GREAT SPEECH More than ono political opponent in the Press has declared Mr. Churchill’s Glasgow Speech on February 9th last . to ho the clearest, most outspoken, and courageous exposition of British Naval policy since the late Lord Goscheii, when First Lord of the Admiralty, commented on Russia’s naval activity a few years before the war in the far East, and brought in a supplementary programme. The chorus of approval over tho Glasgow speech lias in fact, been all but unanimous. Its chief opponents arc members of tho Radical wing of tho First Lord’s own political party, some of whom have talked “an insult” to Germany. What Mr. Churchill did, simultaneously with Lord Haldane’s ' (Secretary of War) unofficial “confab” with German statesmen, was to say frankly exactly what groat Britain is doing and would do. And in this he, was wise. It is the height of international policy to postulate hypothetical powers and to formulate a programme against them. Groat Britain’s only serious opponent is Germany, and it is against England that Germany is building. Therefore, why resort to meaningless subterfuges, such as Lord Charles Bcresford says we should ? It is hotter for Great Britain to declare straight out that she intends to double Germany’s programme each and every time, and to add that if she cares to cease the costly gamo Groat Britain will only he too happy to follow suit. That is now the policy of the Asquith Government, and it is in every sense desirable that Germany should know it. Her.ee Lord Charles’s criticisms drop, harmless. ’’•he gallant Admiral as a politician is not a, success. WHAT MR CHURCHILL SAID. “Whatever may happen abroad here will ho no whining here, no signals of distress will ho hoisted, no erics for help or succor will go up. We will face that future as our ancestors would i avr fared it, without disquiet, without arrogance, hut in stolid and inflexible determination. We should he the erst Power to welcome any retardation or slackening, not by words, but by deeds. But, if there, is to ho an increase, if there are to ho increases upon the Continent of Europe, wo shall have no difficulty in meeting them to the satisfaction of the country. As naval competition becomes more acute wish all have not only to increase t'n number of ships we build, but the ratio which our naval strength will have to bear to other great Powers, so that our margin of superioity will become

larger and not smaller as the strain grows greater. Tims making it clear that other naval Power?, instead of overtaking us h.y additional effort, will only be more out-distanced in consequences of the measures which wo ourselves shall take. . . . Our existence do*

pends on naval power. The whole fortunes of our race ami Empire, all the treasure accumulated during, so many centuries of sacrifice and achievement, would perish and bo swept utterly away if our naval supremacy wore to be onTHE ESSENCE OF THE SPEECH.

The following arc other gleanings gathered from Mr. Churchill’s speech: The rumours current during the last few mouths that the, navy was not in a state of preparedness were absolutely baseless, and tho creation of a naval war staff would render the propagation of such rumours absolutely impossible. Tho Government are determined to maintain British supremacy at sea. The British Navy is to us a necessity ; for Germany from some points of view a navy is more in the nature of a luxury. What is wanted is steady building on a .regular plan ; no sensational or violent departure from our existing methods is required. It is worthy of consideration whether on rnaval proposals ought not to be presented, not in a series of annual propositions, but in a more general survey, which includes within its scope two or three of even a longer period of years. Mr. Churchill also made it clear that he does not favor tho proporals for a naval loan.

tAe GERMAN ANSWER. Germany’s answer came as a disappointment to th efriends of peace and to tire supporters of a reduction, in the present huge armament programmes. A Bill now before the Reichstag calls for the building-of an extra battleship every second year, which, of couive, means that England will build two more than she intended. ’Regrettable as this intention is, it is what was to bo expected. A large section of the Gorman public and press do not trust England. Tho ‘ Vossiscbe Zeitung,’ referring in an article to the recent frienddiip demonstrations in England, said that all these well-intentioned speeches and resolutions have called forth no response in Germany, and there is no use hiding the fact. Our people are tired oi listening to word?, and Genu a ns still

vividly remember how near they were last year to a sanguinary encounter with England. The German nation is not yet ready for those idyllic tones of the soft reed of Peace. The nations have lost their belief in England’s love of freedom. Tho 1 Vossiseho ’ goes on to refer to a. war party in England which long* for war between France and Germany in order that British interests may be advanced thereby rnd British hegemony preserved. Words, however, it says, are like the wind, and it behoves Germany to bo “ toujonrs en vedette.” AN ENGLISH POLITICIAN’S VIEW.

In tho course of a speech at Exeter Mr. F. E. Smith, K.C., M.P., a personal chum of his political opponent, Mr. Churchill, and tho rising hope of tho old-fashioned Tory who believes in “ giving it to 'em hot,” spoke with a vigor that might not have been utilised had ho spoken as a Minister, and not as an irresponsible partisan. What Mr. Smith said, amid loud cheers, (it is easy to secure cheers by such utterances), was as follows: We seek no quarrel, hut when the German naval programme has expanded from the limits of tho Act of Parliament which has been the law of Germany for years, the only answer worthy of England is two ships for every one built in Germany in excess of their programme. We all know it has to come, for the German programme is expanding, and we claim that actions which it is necessary to make for our

o\v nprotection shall lie treated as nonprovocative in Germany, though we may find it difficult to treat their actions as non-provoeativo in England. Mr Churchill’s own speech has been summarised as a restatement in prose of tho once famous Maedormott Music Hall jingle: “We don’t want to fight, hut, by jingo, if wo do, we’ve got tho ships, wc’vo got the men, we’vo got the money too.” It was, in short, a blast of defiance, blended with warning ;ml amicable overtime. Mil. ANGELL’S VIEW.

Mr. Norman Angelil, author of ‘ The Great Illusion,’ recently spoke at Cambridge Union in opposition to a motion proposed by Mr. Robert Yerbnrgh, M.P., president of tho Navy League, who affirmed that tho British Empire ii only safe while England has a naval, supremacy of w two keels to one.” Mr Angel said the overwhelming superiority thus claimed enabled England to dictate Germany’s world policy, and made it impossible for German diplomats, in the event of any international bargaining, to talk on terms of equality. This was not, as had been suggested, a luxury, but a vital matter to the national future of a great people. Admiral himself had said that the supremacy of Great Britain on tho seas meant a perpetually latent control of German commerce and policy. A nation expending at the rate of a million a year could not thus accept passively the dictation of a rival. Englishmen would never accept such a position. Why should they expect Germans top If we assumed, therefore, that a rival would ho as resolute and determined as ourselves, such policy must end cither in the exhaustion of the two peoples concerned or in their collission. Unless they tackled tho source of tho whole trouble, and brought about a bettor understanding of the, facts by the people concerned, conflict was inevitable. If the British and German Navy Leagues, said Mr. Angcll, spent half as much money and energy conferring together to arrive at a hotter understanding of a policy behind armaments they would do infinitely more for peace than they wero doing, and until such efforts were part of their objects they should not have the, support of cither patriotic Gormans or patriotic Englishmen. WHERE WE COME IN.

Putting aside tho facilities that vitiate Air. Angoll’s' arguments, the chief being that human nature can, or will, become other than it is by mean,; of appeals to reason and tho intellectual recognition of the follies and horrors of war, it is move to tho purpose to say that Air. Winstoir Churchill’s scheme is not carried out Groat Britain’s absolute supremacy on tho tea will have departed. Then where, shall we he? The ‘Pall Mall Gazette’ rosently said:— Wo shall ho able to grapple with an emergency, however urgent,, in a distant part of the world without weaking to a clangorous extent the. Home fleet. It is for the, statesmen of the. Dominions to give this matter tho gravest consideration. The safety of tho communication - of the Empire are of as great a concern to tho oversea Dominions as they are to ns. lint the heart is more important even than tho arteries, and the Motherland will shrink from no sacrifice in warding off a pertinacious threat of Imperial existence. She will use her resources to tho 1- ft, hut if Imperial unity stands for r mo than a mere phrase, tho,time lias co re for daughter States to range them ;elvos firmly by her side. A hint from thorn would do more than aught else to show .Great Britain’s \rivals the, fntnlity of attempting to wrest tho trident from our fist. Such aid will ho cheap in tho long run, no matter what its present cost. The only answer, so far, to this appeal, comes from South Africa, where the Union Parliament lias decided, for the present, not to add to its purely nominal contribution to the’ Navy,