NAVAL STRENGTHS

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 117, 15 February 1928, Page 11

NAVAL STRENGTHS

' UNITED STATES' SUPERIORITY OVER BRITAIN ■■• ■ I ■ ■ - NSISTED UPON BY MR. WILBUR REASONS FOR BIG BUILDING ‘ PROGRAMME J ; In defending the naval programme Mr. Wilbur insisted th< the United States had and could maintain naval superiors over Britain, but to reassure the nations of America’s peEeful intentions the United States had agreed at the ,Wdiington Conference to an extensive scrapping programe. By Telegraph.-—Press Association.—Copyright.

(R. February 14, 10.20 p.m.) >1 New York, February 13. ■’ In .remarkable speech before the busine, men of Indianapolis, Mr. C. D. Wilbu: (Secretary of the.; Navy) defendedthe naval programme. He insisted hat the United States had and couldiaintain naval superiority over Britair but to reassure the nations of the wdd of America’s peaceful intentions, -ae United States had agreed to an eiensive scrapping programme at the Washington Conference, which involvd a monetary loss in the scrappmg o new ships and equipment. Mr. Wilbur added:.“And yet we find ■ oirselss assailed .on every side by the pacifist: .declarations that we are becoming ■ militaristic.” He ' insisted tiat th American programme was in lirge measure a replacement- programm.

Then turning to the Geneva Conference M. Wilbur said: “In the-sense that Brain could have agreed with the cither tv> Powers and did not do so, the faul for the failure is hers.’’ Mr. Wilbur aid that Britain sprang a surprise by proposing to divide cruisers into two classes.- This ingenious proposition was well fitted to the needs o Britain and her Empire, bu America’s lack of naval bases mae the proposal impracticable for her. Britain’s . minimum needs of £OO,OOO ton was not the limitation of armament, but rather an agreement to extend artament, and thereunder the (United Staes would have been compelled to biild between 500,000,000 and 1750,000,000 lollars’ worth of ships not well adapte! to American use obtain a nomiial parity in tonnage with Britain. Anerica could not complain concerning Britain's desire to ~spread the expenditire over a comparatively large number of small cruisers. America as long ago as last summer,

’ Mr. Wilbur said, had made it clear that she desired to build a navy for her needs, and not for the purpose of attaining parity with Britain. There was ho idea of feverish activity because of the failure of the Geneva Conference. The fundamental reason for the present programme being so large was that the United States had not been building because of the hope for a supplemental treaty to the Washington Treaty. (Rec. February 14, 11.35 p.m.) New York, February 13. Mr. Wilbur said the United States was willing to accept .the hazard due to a decrease in the number of ships at Geneva if other nations were, willing to accept similar hazards. Those who were attacking the programme would compel American sailors to fight blindfolded. The American fleet in gun power, torpedo power, and striking power was satisfactory, but in cruisers and destroyers, which were the eyes of the fleet, there were many obsolescent vessels, which must be replaced. America, >vas not planning a fleet superior to Britain’s. The' Navy Department was desirous of building the necessary auxiliaries now before being confronted with the problems of replacing capital ships in accordance with the Washington Treaty. The five-year programme would cost 740,000,000 dollars. The American candy bill in 1925 was 750,000,000. dollars, while 1,825,000,000 dollars were spent on cosmetics, and 900,000,000 dollars on theatres.

The speaker then said: "Britain’s rubber monopoly would have .taken 1,000,000,000 dollars from us in the last two years if it had not been for our Secretary for Commerce.” Mr. Wilbur concluded by stating .that American resources were sufficiently great to justify the American expenditures.