THE BRITISH CABINET AND THE NAVY.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1965, 23 January 1914, Page 6

THE BRITISH CABINET AND THE NAVY.

■,rto^--~- —*—■ — ' The navah policy of the Government is the subject of acute controversy in Britain at the present time,. and it is stated that there is difference of opinion in the Cabinet itself regarding the Navy Estimates one section of the Ministers supporting Mr, CmmcHiLri's proposals to maintain the generally accepted margin of superiority, while the other section is backing up Mn. LloydGeorge's demand for a reduction -in expenditure. According to a cablegrain which appeared in yesterday's issue Mr. Churohili, did not .spoc-iQc-ally deny the assertion that tho. Cabinet was divided, but he declared that the newspaper ruinours. to that effect were "basnd merely on surmise and gossip, and should be uniformly distrusted. "■ Later cablegrams show that the Daily Telegraph still persists that there have been differences among Ministers, and this is in a measure borne out by the announcement of the Dnihi .Vcim, one of the '.leading Liberal 'organs, that tk Naval Estimates ."have been severely pruned, as the Government is determined to check the spendthrift policy." ' It. is., however, difficult to understand how the Cabinet could _b* unanimously in favour of a material

■decrease in expenditure on the Navy, in-view of the attitude which Mfc. CncECHILL ; hn6 bithsfto takeu up, litochreceat:. utterances by otter Min-

■istors/'v'Only-■k'3day-or: two ago;Lonß :.Haldank staled that .the Liberals tlie! ■iiot!;intbncl. : to*;.wonkcii the Navy or ■fkpart from'..t))t>.sU>hdai , d of effi-ciency-laid, dmvii: niid the'Postmas-■ti'r-Cioncval (Mr.'-.Herbert , Samuel) declared that Britain must maintain a <iO per .cent, 'superiority.. of capital-:., ships. , ■'■' ::Tlicsc ■ nrunouncornents'are satisfactory as far-as , they go, but it'is : alninst impossible U; reconcile ■■ them with the views of the Chancellor of the:' Exchequer (Mb. Llovo-Geokge) and tho attitude of tha' President of the Board of Agri.culture-: (Sir; ,, Walter lluncimas). A scmsation , was recently caused by the publicatioii : of .a cemversation ■'.. b.«tween Mr. ■ Lt.oyd-George ■ and ■ ■ a friend, iin which tho former expressed, the opinion that "-m effort should .be'made to reduce the' ovenvhelming extravagance of "oxponditurc on armaments," and that the present .was a' favourable time to deal with the matter. This idea has been eagerly taken up by a section of the ■Radicals,.and at a recent meeting at which Sir.Walter Hunciman was present, a resolution- was passed urging a reduction in armaments. Such facts as these certainly point to a diversity of opinion among Ministers; and whether the Cabinet- is divided or not, it is quite certain that there is a line of cleavage in the Liberal party in connection with this question, while the Unionists are unanimously in favour of pressing resolutely forward with the shipbuilding programme. When it is remembered that other nations are increasing their naval and military strength as fast as they can, there is sure to be a griat outcry in Britain against any decrease in defence expenditure. Still the "Little Navy" section arc becoming very active, and are bringing great pressure to.hear on the Government, this position lieine well described in the, following extract from the Economist:—-

Liberal ns.oocintionfs are musing rpsnlutions aßttinst the Churchill pfoßranrno of naval expansion, and Liberal ue«- F . piinors all over tho country ai-e b[>Rinning to criticism or even to ri*iiounco tho First J.ofs], evidently fearing thftt his poney will oml in an nnponular liu'lpet and the defeat of Home Rule. He is warned by tho "Daily Chronicle," fiently reprimnndeel by the "Westminster Gazette," sincerely admonished by the "Mnnchnster Guardian." castlpihtfil by the "Dailv yew?," nnd unsparinptly trounced by the "Aberdeen Free Press"-" that moderate orunn of thp shrewdest business community in thp -world. According to our Aberdonian rmitemporni-y, "if he ,ir«l the naval nippaloinaniacs ni'e allowed much further vope they will hnng not only themselves but Liberalism with them." The only Imp? of relief is that, the Chancellor of the. Kxclipqiipr "will find it impossible to finnuco this Jingo Admiralty"; for freah taxation "will wreck the Government at the polls, and properly W

Taking all things into consideration, there seems to be a stormy time ahead of the Government, but as the London Times remarks, "it is difficult _to belinvc that Ministers will stultify ' their previous policy, or that disruption will follow over the Estimates, which are presumably based upon the five years' projrrammc already explained in Parliament, and by the Admiralty memorandum to the Canadian Government.',