Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Empire's Strength

A. C.

HOLMS.

Sir,— Having for a lengthy period— * - as far back as 1909 — taken a deep interest in the problem of Jmperial defence, I read with special approval your leading article of Saturday. It was very timely comment on an utterance that struck me as provocative rather than helpful, not being justified by the facts of our natipnal situation — the defenceless state of almost all the overseas Dohiains of. our Empire and tho questionable readiness of the Homeland for a possible combined a»sault from two great Powers; The position of the British possessions in Australasia is notably precarious, having in view the dominant naval and military influence of a highly efficient Oriental nation east of the Suez Canal. In the absence of a twoPower standard of superiority — enjoyed on sea for many years prior to 1900, and almost upheld till 1914, thanks largely to the insistence of the Earl of Meath, Earl Roberts, \V. T. Stoad, Robert Blasetford,, and Mr. Winston Churchill — in the matter of armament, our Empire cannot confidently boast of its strength on land, sea, or in the air, and should adopt a policy of comparative silence .pending the compl^ tion of the programme in progress. , There is a strong call for much more effective action — and speediness— tha® > liag so far marked Australi'a and Kew Zealand plans. A small popalace in general experience requires a higher defence expenditure per head than • large one, but we have always allowed a reverse process to operate — and even in this present hour of grave danger are content with an insignificantly i®adequate outlay of £1 per capita, M Gompared with Australia's £1 10/-, and Britain's £5, in terms of eurrent . budgets. Without capitql ships — not even .at Singapore — and strong Pacific and Tasman squadrons of cruisers, destroyera, aircraft-carriers and submarines, it i* obvious that the Commonwealth and New Zealand and Fijian Governments have not displayed noteworthy anxietj as to the safety .of these very valuable outposts of our great Empire. — Youra, etc..

Waipukurau, Dec. 14, 1937. P.S. — I would suggest, Mr. Editor, that copies of Saturday' s HeraldTribune be forwarded, with your compliments, to the- Rt. Hon. Neville Chamberlain, the Foreign Secretary, the Minister for War, the Dominions' Secretary, and the Rt. Hon. WinSton Churchill (ex-First Lord of the Admiralty), giving them some insight into public opiuion on a really vital issue. — A.C.H.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HBHETR19371216.2.71.2

Bibliographic details

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 71, 16 December 1937, Page 6

Word Count
397

The Empire's Strength Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 71, 16 December 1937, Page 6

The Empire's Strength Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 71, 16 December 1937, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert