The Dominion. FRIDAY, MARCH 19, 1909. THE NAVAL CRISIS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 460, 19 March 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, MARCH 19, 1909. THE NAVAL CRISIS.

"A profound sensation," wo are told, has been created in Great Britain by the debate upon the Navy Estimates—a very natural result of the most remarkable and momentous discussion which the House of Commons has heard for many years. A week ago the controversy upon British naval policy, so we can realise now, was nothing more than a dispute between rival factions neither of' which dreamed that the true position was charged,with peril to the Empire. Tho moderates were fighting to prevent what they considered the party of ambitious megalomania from obtaining too large a share of the nation's money for the carrying out of their schemes; the advocates of a larger Navy were anxious chiefly to maintain what they believed was the colossal security of Great Britain, and they would only have suffered an abstract disappointment if tho Naval Estimates showed no increase. To-day the Empire is face to face with the fact that Germany is racing almost side by side with Britain, and that the duty before Britain is, not to sec that she is as strong as any two foreign Powers, but to beware lest sho find herself unable to compete with an unaided Germany. ■ The decision of the British Government to embark upon a larger naval programme than ever is now explained by the First Lord of the Admiralty as being due to tho discovery that Germany has not only learned how to build battleships quickly, but has been pushing ahead the carrying out of her programme at a speed which nobody in Great Britain thought possible. This discovery, according to the Prime Minister, was made in November last, and it has had the wholesome result of inducing Mr. Asquith to give up tho policy of taking any chances whatever. Quito late in last year he was confident that he could dismiss the possibility that Germany would carry out her programmes. He has discovered his orror, and with praiseworthy prudence he has decided—or so it would appearto leave nothing whatever to chance, but to proceed on the basis of treating as a certainty every possibility inimical to Great Britain's supremacy. He confesses frankly that the hypothesis on which the last naval programme was based has been falsified by events; and, having made one miscalculation, ho is not going to mako for although Germany, has given.

"an explicit and most distinct declaration" that she does not intend to further accelerate her naval programme, he intends to act on the assumption that this declaration may not be adhered to.

The most important passage in the debate is one that should shatter the dreams of those who have hoped that Germany and Britain can cease their naval rivalry.

"There is no possibility," said the Prime Minister, "of an'arrangement with Germany for mutual reduction. Efforts in that direction have been made, and have failed. If Germany accelerates her building programme, we will have time during the year to make the necessary provision." The sincerity of the present Government's desire for a peaceful arrangement with Germany is unquestioned, and the failure of its efforts in that direction render it impossible, therefore, that Germany's naval policy can be treated as anything other than a policy aimed to compass the destruction of Great Britain's sea power, and, therefore, the destruction of the Empire. The gravity of the situation revealed by the debate cannot be overstated; indeed, as Mr. Balfour says, our difficulty will lie in fully appreciating its import. Britain's supremacy in capital ships is on the verge of disappearance, and what is more, she is apparently not able to keep on building these ships appreciably faster than her rival. The Daily News, which the oth'e'r day hailed as being in accordance with "the great

ideal of Liberalism" a resolution in which the National Liberal Federation declared that it could not recognise, "on

fclio evidence at present before the country, that a case had been established for the suggested increase in naval expenditure," has frankly, though reluctantly, revised its opinions, and now supports the increased vote. The Daily Chronicle and

Westminster Gazette, also staunch Liberal newspapers, have recognised the extreme gravity of the situation.

Since nono of the messages sent to us

by cable indicate the existence of panic or extravagance in the comments of poli-

ticians or newspapers, it may be assumed that the shock of the debate has produced in the nation a high sobriety. This fact, and the non-party character of Mit. Balfouk's criticisms, are gratifying features of a situation both unpleasant and dangerous. No man in the Empire is unconcerned with the position now revealed; in

;ho minds of many people in this and in

the other oversea States there are probably some thoughts upon the duty of the Empire as a whole in respect of its naval defence. The debate brings out the inadequacy of the colonial contributions. As we showed the other day, the people of tho British Isles will be required to pay at the very least £40,000,000 for the maintenance of the Navy next year, or nearly £l per head of population. If Great Britain can take that toll from its citizens, the citizens of the rich and fastdeveloping colonies should bo able to pay at least that amount. Such a levy upon

the white people in the self-governing dependencies, who number about 12,000,000, would yield £12,000,000. It is conceivable

that circumstances might arise when the advocacy of such a broadening of the basis of naval finance would be necessary. It is conceivable, too, in view of the capacity and determination of Germany,

that the colonies eventually may have to come to the Admiralty's aid. That is a matter for future consideration, however, and in the meantime there is cause for congratulation in the solid front which British parties are presenting to the dangerous activity of the chief naval and commercial rival of Britain.