Wairarapa Daily Times [Established Over 50 Years.] THURSDAY DECEMBER 29, 1927. AMERICAN NAVAL AIMS.

Wairarapa Daily Times, 29 December 1927, Page 4

Wairarapa Daily Times [Established Over 50 Years.] THURSDAY DECEMBER 29, 1927. AMERICAN NAVAL AIMS.

Evidently the British Government, judging by the First Lord’s statement on the United States naval programme, is prepared to Jet at least one foreign country build to any strength it likes without necessarily keeping pace, “if we can possibly help it.” The American agitation is of first-class importance to the British dominions m the Pacific, simply because it challenges the supremacy of the British’Navy in which we have .grown up, and upon which the oversea British peoples, have been able to relegate national defence to second, and even third, place in rank of local political importance. Despite disquieting signs, there is probably no need yet to presume that the expiry of the ten years’ term of the Washington Agreement of 1921 will fail to see a renewal. of that understanding. The best service towards such a renewed agreement can, perhaps, be done by ignoring American building for a time. The British Government is, aparentlv, tired of conferences and negotiations with th« United States on this question. It seems that American agitation feeds voraciously on such discussions. The United States naval service smarts under a sense of inferiority. It has been lining for some time to work up a lively public sense of its inadequacy. The President lias endeavoured to restrict demands for new construction, while, by word of mouth, supporting claims for American equality on the seas. The House of Representatives swayed for a

time by almost Anglophobian propaganda, has quietened down considerably since its own earnest enquiry in 1924-25 as to “whether we were out-generalled in the limitation treaty.” It should be remembered that much of the building by all navies during the years since the war has been for necessary replacement of obsolete ships; that the United States is notoriously deficient in cruisers, and that her submarines have been found unequal to British and Japanese types, and that American naval commanders have freely condemned the imperfections in the American auxiliary fleet as revealed by grand scale manoeuvres during recent years. Replacement, then, is generally the cause of building. On the other hand, the growing inclination to limit armament by agreement is prompted to a great extent by the vastly higher cost of individual ships. Scientific developments have led to enormous increases in the battle power of men-ot-war. The cost of a battleship to-day is five or six times that of the pre-war ship. Simultaneously, the term of a ship’s useful life has decreased. Twenty years is now the life of a ship of the line, fifteen that of a cruiser, and (because of her incredible enginepower in so small a shell) not more than ten that of a destroyer. One war year counts as two years of peace in these lives. Moreover, the annual bill for keeping modern ships in commission is so great that in nine years the maintenance of a vessel amounts to more than her first capital outlay. The newly completed “Nelson,” costing €7,000,000, to build, will thus cost nearly £23.000,000 before she is sent to be scrapped.