The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1911. IMPERIAL NAVAL DEFENCE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1076, 15 March 1911, Page 6

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1911. IMPERIAL NAVAL DEFENCE.

Nothing could be more fortunate than the chance that the announcement of the British Naval Estimates has been immediately followed by the publication of Aduieal Sir Reginald Henderson's report on the naval de-

fence of Australia, Ordinarily, we aro afraid, the British naval programme for the year touches nothing deeper in the average colonial's mind than his • interest in hugeness, his mild wonder how Britain keeps i. up, and his satisfaction at the promise of more and more ships flying the' white ensign. But Admiral Henderson's report is a footnote that gives a cutting edge to the British figures; it will make thousands of colonials think, who never thought before, of the expensiveness of naval supremacy and of what a wretchedly small portion of the burden the colonies have until now been bearing— and, in the case of New Zealand, is 'still bearing. Until_vcry lately the average overseas Briton has never realised that the twenty, or thirty, or forty millions expended yearly by the Mother Country have not come out of some purse of Fortunatu3; the figure of the weary Titan has never come home to him as a very real description of a nation which every year sets aside such- a colossal sum, and. such a huge force of human energy, for the maintenance of the safety of the Empire.' Even when it has been pointed out, as we are almost weary of pointing out, that Englishmen have been paying fivd or six times as much as New Zoalanders towards the Empire's naval defence, they; arc few who realise the facts behind the figures. . Not much need bo said of the new British Estimates. They arc millions greater than ever, of course; and, of course also, they have given general satisfaction save to those sections of opinion which are voiced by the Daily Nclcs and Morning Leader— tho Radicals, Socialists'and Little Englanders. To us there should be ; much satisfaction in the thought that as little notice as ever is taken of the foolish people who would have Britain arrange her naval policy so as _to please Germany. The first point that strikes one in the big scheme recommended to Australia by Admiral Henderson is the fact that large as is the burden proposed it will never bo much more than half so large, in proportion to population, as the burden borne by Britain. The total expenditure proposed by the Admiral is over eightyeight millions sterling, to be spread over twenty-two years. He suggests an expenditure of £3,000,000 a year to begin with, rising ultimately to £5,000,000; but as the population of Australia will continue to grow, the actual charge per head is unlikely to rise above the initial sum of ten or twelve shillings. In Great Britain the expenditure is about one pound per head. The comments of the Sydney press upon Admiral Henderson's scheme do not help us to a knowledge of how the figures strike' tho Australian public; but it is pretty certain that they will have a distinctly sobering effect, and it is not over-rating the Australian people's character, we think, to add that most Australians will be prepared to assume the now burden. Great as it may appear, it is still far lighter than what the people of the United Kingdom bear cheerfully and have borne for years. The great importance of tho Australian scheme, so far, as New Zealand is concerned, is its reinforcement of the lesson which even tho increasingly enormous Naval Budgets of Britain have failed to teach New Zealanders, namely, the impossibility of securing naval efficiency without material sacrifices.

This is a lesson that Sir Joseph Ward does not appear quite able to learn. His remarkable speech in Sydney "on Saturday night shows this very plainly, for although amongst his platitudes there are phrases that might be read as cvi-. elence of his feeling that the maintenance of the two-Power standard has passed from a British into an Imperial duty, he avoided expressing agreement with the principle of Admiral'Henderson's report, namely, that colonial participation in the general scheme of Imperial naval defence should be at least on a pro rata basis. The problems of Umpire, the importance of the twoPower standard, and the duty 'of New Zealand lead Sir Joseph Ward to proclaim, not that New Zealand should rise to the level of her obligations, but that New Zealand must be given a voice in a fantastic "Parliament of Defence." "They must join closer hands"; "the question for consideration is whether the time has not arrived for the consideration of an altered Imperial policy"; "some broader naval system must bo created"—what is the use of such phrases as these ? The point for New Zcalanders is that Sir Joseph Ward said nothing to encourage the idea of material sacrifices for the Empire. The Pall Mall G'a-ettc, certainly, thinks it sees in the speech "the perception lately seized by Britons overseas that the Empire's defence is a burden which Britain is no longer able to carry alone" ; but the Gazette goes on to call this vague speech "the first candid, official announcement that the Dominions are ready to fullv discharge their moral obligations." We should have thought that the first and second official announcements of what we are certain i 6 a solid fact j uare the Canadian and Australian'

:iaval policies. It is no use blinking the fact that New Zealand has not been permitted by its governors to contribute much more than talk to the maintenance of British supremacy. New Zealand docs not in the least desire tho "Imperial Defence Parliament" that occurred to Sir Joseph Ward on his way to Sydney and that he would be puzzled to reduce to a concrete proposal; but New Zealand is ready to do its duty, if it were permitted to do it, and we earnestly wisli that the TniME Minister would believe us upon this point. He bitterly opposed compulsory military training almost to the last moment, alleging that the country "would not stand it." He is equally mistaken in supposing that New Zealand is unwilling fully to discharge her moral obligations in the matter of the naval defence of the Empire. Wc long ago—nearly two years ago—pointed out that a little prudence and honesty in government would furnish the sum required to make up our contribution to a million a year if necessary. Can we not afford that prudence and honesty for the luxury of self-respect and safety'