NAVAL DEFENCE.
DOMINIONS AN U ADMIRALTY,
AUSTRALIA'S ATTITUDE.
STATEMENT BY CAPTAIN MUIRHEAD COLLINS.
Tho ofiiciau Secretary to the Commonwealth in London (Captain Muirhead Collins) recently contributed tho following article to the-"Morning Post": "It is naturally a source of satisfaction to Australians to find that their policy in regard to Naval Defence ,is quickly becoming accepted as meeting best tho requirements of _ Imperial policy. Subject to ■ some criticisiti at tho outset, the Australian view that tlio same main principles should apply to the contribution of a self-governing Dominion to the sea power as to the land power of tho Empire has now so far established itself that, judging by the correspondence wliich is appearing in your columns, it will soon not meet with any objection at all in any responsible quarter.
Probably it will be of interest to students of Imperial Defence to have realised. tho leading facts .regarding tlio development of naval policy in Australia since the granting b.v the British Government of responsible Government. The first occasion on which the Australian Navy came into the sphere of Empire politics was in 1884, when tho Victorian State Government offered for the help of tho British Government in the war then, proceeding in the Sudan a littlo flotilla of warships, tho Albert, the Victoria, and the Cliilders. These boats actually sailed for Suakjn, but; uniko tho New South Wales military contingent, were not called upon for active service. That incident, trifling, in itself, was the first instance in history of an offer of Imperial naval co-opera-tion. It shows that more than a quarter of a century ago there existed in Australia a desire to take a. share of the responsibilities of tho naval ; defence of tho Empire. Then, as now, tho accepted method was the organisation of a local fleet, homogeneous with the Mother Country's fleet in all matters of discipline and training, and giving to local patriotic enthusiasm the stimulus of seeing a tangible addition to tho Empire's strength as the result of its efforts. , Early Days, Responsible Government had been granted, to tho chief Australian States in 1855. Almost at once there was an offort in tho different States (not then federated) .to organise naval forces. New South Wales, because its capital, Sydney, was the headquarters of the British Navy.in tho South Pacific, was not bo forward in_the matter as other States, bjit in that State a naval brigade was raised, and by 1885 tw.o vtorpedoboats had been actually built in Sydney and manned' by Australians. Tho Victorian Government had a 'flotilla consisting of gunboats and torpedo-boats, , together with tho harbour turret defence ship Cerberus. Queensland organised a local naval force in 1884, with two gunboats, a torpedo-boat, and various small craft. In the same year South Australia had built for her the. Protector, a small cruiser, which was. the most powerful Australian sea-going warship .until tho coming into being of tho present Commonwealth fleet. The Protector saw service in foreign watersj carrying an Australian naval contingent'to Cliina to help in the suppression' of the Boxer outbreak (to which "small" war Victoria and Now South Wales also sent naval brigades).' These.facts will show that tho. idea of. maintaining local naval forces in Aus-, tralia was of very early origin. It may be noted'that'- in the .establishment o'f all. these Australian navies the British Government cordially co-operated'. The policy of assisting the naval defence of the Empiro by a cash subsidy' was. not tried in Australia .until .1887, when tho auxiliary squadron agreement was made.' . Under this tho various Australian States paid £126,000 a year to the British Admiralty, and, in return, a Special; fleet was'maintained in Australian waters. This fleet, it may be noted, was not to be cmployed outside of Australian waters in peace or war without the consent of tho various • State Governments. There was tlnis actually a greater. limitation/ on the freedom of Imperial action of the Australian Auxiliary Squadron under tho-subsidy agreement than there is of the ■ present Commonwealth fleet. To remove that from Australian waters tho. British Admiralty has to consult but one Government, not six Governments.
"Subsidy Era." Viewed; historically, the "subsidy era" of Australian participation in Imperial naval defence cannot woll be considered .to liave been satisfactory. The subsidy aroused no enthusiasm. The character of, the ships of the Auxiliary Squadron was sometimes the subject of caustic comment. The facilities which the subsidy agreement provided for the training of Australian seamen were not taken advantago of. In 1899 a conference of Australian naval officers put forward their objections to (the subsidy system in the following memorandum ;It has been the design.of the conference to outline a scheme whereby the available naval defence in Australia shall advance pari passu with the growth and development of tho Australian Commonwealth, and become less year by year a charge on the Imperial forces and Exchequer; to develop our resources and tho training' of our seamen, so that instead of remaining a source of weakness and anxiety to the Mother Country—an exposed flank—wo may gradually becomo a strong outpos't. To accomplish this it is necessary to have special regard to the nature of defence requisite for an island .continent. N
it was with the object of developing Australian naval efficiency that the late Admiral Tryon suggested tho formation of tho Auxiliary Squadron., The progressive policy which it is certain he intended to carry out with this endjn view has not advariccd from tho initial stage at which Sir George Tryon left it. ■ AVhen the Auxiliary Ipquadron ' was first established by agreement between the colonies and tho Admiralty it was generally understood, in .Australia, at any rate, that the ships would from form a means of drilling and training Australian seamen. This expectation has .never been realised, the vessels in reserve having always been laid up in Sydney, and no attempt has been made to utilise them for the benefit of tho local naval forco. There has, consequently, - been no advance in Australia's ability to undertako any houourablo sharo in her sea defence. • The.present policy—viz., that of tho payment in specie in return for naval dei'cnco furnished in toto by the mother country—makes no advance whatever, _ Twenty;or fifty years hence Australia's ability' for sea defence —solf-dc-fence—will bo as to-day, and as it was ten years ago. A continuanco of the present policy involves oithor . tho periodical increase of the amount paid to tho Imperial Government for naval defence, that tho growing trade and interests of tho federation may bo adequately protected, or, if that, amount bo not, increased, wo must ox|)ecfc a justifiable complaint from the. British taxpayer. In this connection it is well to remember tho high noinl, already readied by the Imperial Naval Estimates. In tlm event of. a European combination of such strength as to occupy tho attention of tjio British Heels, the continunnco of a policy which iu 110 way
nrlvjincos Australian ability lor sea'defence might have disastrous consequences. Manhood as Well as Money. , Nevertheless, in 1903—after federation—a new subsidy agreement, in which New Zealand was a partner, was made, 'Under this tho subsidy was fixed at roughly £200,000 a year for Australia and i;4(),000 a year tor Mew Zealand. Tho conditions in regard to the auxiliary fleet and the training of Australians and New Zealandors wore improved, making some concessions to tho patriotic; wish of tho people of Australasia to put their manhood as well as their money into the lino ol defence. Four of tho sliips, it was provided, were to ho manned as far as possible by citizens of Australia and Now Zealand. Still tho'subsidy .system raised mo enthusiasm. It survived in Australia only because it wag so emphatically endorsed by the defence authorities in tho Mother Country. In 1905 Sir. Dcakin, then Prime Minister of Australia, expressed Australian sentiment in a dispatch to the British Government, which stated: Tho paramount importanco of. the navy to the British Empire and to Australia may bo taken to bo freely admitted. Nothing in this dispatch is intended to question it. Indeed, our obligations to sliare in tho general defence of the Empire have been already recognised in prr.ct;co and in principle. Beyond this 'jho defence of Australia and of its coasts is accepted as a duty and as a necessity of our national selfrespect. Yet, even under these circumstances, tho present naval agreement is not, and never has been, popular in the Commonwealth. It has been approved only in default of a better means of indicating our acceptance of Imperial responsibilities. Whatever may he the assumed basis upon which our contribution is there determined, it is regarded as merely an arbitrary proportion of an existing expenditure. Whatever the intention. may have been; this attempt at joint naval action lias failed to enlist a fraction of the support that was spontaneously accorded in all tho States to the dispatch of military contingents to South' Africa.
t In 1907 Mr. Deakin definitely committed Australia, to the policy of a local navy, with tho approval, in the main, of .all parties. His successor in office, Mr. Fisher, ordered in 1908 the first two Commonwealth warships. The Irnperiil Defence Conference of 1904 followed, when the British Admiralty came into lino with Australian public opinion, and suggested 1 the advauced naval policy which Australia is 110w carrying out.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19140102.2.80
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1947, 2 January 1914, Page 8
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,550NAVAL DEFENCE. Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1947, 2 January 1914, Page 8
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.