IMPERIAL SQUADRON.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1755, 21 May 1913, Page 7

IMPERIAL SQUADRON.

gift ship units,

WHY GIBRALTAR WILL BE ITS BASE. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright (Kec. May 20, 10.15 p.m.) London, May 20. It is stated with regard to the proposed Imperial Squadron that the Admiralty intends that the respective Governments contributing the ships shall settle the itinerary of tho Squadron. Apparently there has been some misunderstanding about Gibraltar as the base of tho naval force, it is remarked, but the Squadron will not be tied to any port. It is necessary, though, for administrative purposes to choose a port where spare parts, reserves of ammunition, and general stores can bo held, and Gibraltar has thus been chosen for tho Imperial Squadron, which will really be an Imperial force, and not an accession to the Home Fleet.

[A _ speech by the First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr. Winston Churchill, giving an outline of the Admiralty's intentions injrespect to the gift ships, will be found elsewhere in this issue.]

In the Canadian House of Commons, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Leader of the Opposition, in his final speech on the Navy Bill (which provides for the gift of three battleships at a oost of .£7,000,000 to tho Navy), said it was a hollow mockery to say that an emergency existed in Great Britain necessitating additional battleships in the North Sea, as Mr. Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty, had deliberately decided to place the proposed Canadian gift ships not in the North Sea, but at Gibraltar. The Nationalists, continued Sir Wilfrid Laurier, could uow rest in peace, because their sons would not be disembowelled while the warships remained under the shelter of the guns of Gibraltar.

CANADA'S CONTRIBUTION. MR. BORDEN REPLIES TO SIR W. LAURIER. (Rec. May 20, 11.30 p.m.) Ottawa, May 20. Tho Prime Minister, Mr. R. L. Borden, iu a speech at Toronto criticising Sir Wilfrid Laurier's opposition to tho Canadian Naval Bill, said the latter's attitude was well expressed by a New Zealand statesman when he said that Sir Wilfrid Laurier's attitude was one of aloofness when a definite proposal to aid the Empire was proposed,_ with eloquent dissertations on the importance of Canada preserving her autonomy.

Sir Wilfrid Laurier's policy, Mr. Borden said, was undoubtedly of a separatist nature, no matter how it was disguised.

If the Senate rejected the proposals contained in the Navy measure, Mr. Borden concluded, an immediate reipedy would be sought by the-Cabinet, and it would undoubtedly be foimd.