EMPIRE AND NAVIES.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 596, 26 August 1909, Page 5

EMPIRE AND NAVIES.

CANADA'S PROJECT.

CRUISERS AND SMALLER GRAFT.

INTEREST COST £600,000.

(Br Teleeraph.—Pr«i» Aefioclallon.-Coprrlgbt.l (Rec. August 25, 1Q p.m.) London, August 25. The Ottawa correspondent of the London "Daily Mail" reports that the initial construction programme in connection with the Canadian Navy is expected to include: ' Cruisers ! 4 or 5 Torpedo destroyers 6 Submarines 6 It is estimated that tho interest cost on the capital expenditure involved by tho programme will be £600,000 a year. [The cost of upkeep of the proposed Australian unit' is estimated - at <6750,000 to ■£1,000,000 annually.] At a later stage, Canada intends to construct shipyards on the Atlantio and the Pacific coasts. AUSTRALIAN SCHEME COMMENDED. London j" August 24. "The strong initiative taken by Australia in the matter of military and naval defence," says "The Times," "is a source of. the profoundest satisfaction to all in Britain who look for the speediest elaboration by eaoh Dominion of a self-reliant system, capable of co-ordination with the British foroes. "While the relations of the Federal and State Governments , arc no concern of ours," j adds "The Times," "we must welcome most I cordially the growth of co-operation between them as the surest means of increasing their wealth and strength." ' , . : ■ • VOLUNTARY-SPONTANEOUS. Bt. John's, August 24. • Sir Edward Morris, the Premier, has returned to Newfoundland from London. ' . "The Imperial Defence Conference," Sir Edward states, "has'been the most effective step taken in our day to preserve the world's peaoo by maintaining Britain's position as Mistress of tho Sea; "Such a Conference was impossible three years ago. It has become possible now because it was! spontaneous j it has been successful because During the Conference not a discordant note was struck; the only , difference of opinion was regarding the methods'to be adopted.

"The prevailing sentiment," the Premier added, "was a desire that the overseas Dominions should contribute to the maintenance of the Empire.' They do not want their lives, traded and liberty any longer to be protected by the British tar and soldier without contributing to the maintenance of both, and sharing in tie work of both." NEW CONSTRUCTION. GERMANY LEADS BY HALF A MILLION. (Rec. August 25, 11 p.m.) 1 London, August 25. A return of the.naval expenditure of the principal Powers comparos their total costs, and also : the amounts voted for new construction.

In total cost, the figures for 1909 for Britain, , Germany, and the United States compare as ' under'

Britain \ ... ... £35,000,000. : Germany • £19,500,000. ' \ United States... £28,750,000. The. amounts voted' for. new construction were as under:— '■ ■ Britain,' ... .; ... £10,250,194. .Germany- £10,751,406: • United States ■ ... £10,015,101. ' COMPARISONS FOR FIVE, YEARS. The .above figures as to new .construction, given approximately , in; the cablegram, were stated in the House of Commons.last March by the First.Lord of-tho Admiralty, Alr. M'Kenna, and were cabled at the time. The outlay on new construction and armament is the item which determines the future material forceiof a fleot, - The following table (published in a London paper) shows- comparatively this outlay,'; in Britain and in Germany, ■ during the last five years;—| , - New construction and armament. _ : Britain. Germany. Year. . £ , •' j> '• 1905 _ . ... 12,500,000' V ' 4,800,000 ; •1908 ... 12,100,000 5,300,000: 1907 -. 10,500,000 i ... 6,700,000' 1008- .... . ... 3,G00,C00 '8,500,000 1000 ... 10,250,194 , 10,751,4GG And in 1910 it is estimated that Germany will spend on new construction and armament X' 12,600,000! It will be seen that between 1905 and 1909 Germany much more than doubled her out ny on new construction. While the' British outlay was descending, that of Germany was steadily, mounting. . - : ■ The same paper publishes a' table of total costs, which, while it does not tally exactly with the figures cabled to-day provides an interesting comparison. This table includes loan .expenditure. The figures before the decimal point represent millions: ,

• 1303. 1003. 1007. 1008. 1005. Britain 35.1. '32.3 31.6 34.2 36.5 Germany 20,1 .16.0 13.9 12.4 11,4 United States 2?.8 .21.3_ 20.8 23.7 22.8 Ftpiw 13.3 ; 12.7 . 12.4 13.0 12.7