SINGAPORE BASE.

Hokitika Guardian, 21 March 1924, Page 3

SINGAPORE BASE.

[Recters Telegrams.] SYDNEY PRESS CRITICS. SYDNEY, March 21. The “Daily Telegraph,” in a leader under the caption, “Our greatest crisis since .1914,” says:—lt is satisfactory to learn that the Socialist Ministry now governing Great Britain, in the teeth of a two-thirds majority of the electors, is not to he allowed to surrender Britisli interests in the Pacific without a protest on behalf of the trustrated public opinion in this country. Although this is an Empire problem vitally affecting the sea supremacy of Britain and lias to be dealt with in that light, it lias aspecial interest to Australia which, without a base for battleships to operate from in southern waters, would have to trust its future to the respect of other nations. The withdrawal of the Britisli navv from the Pacific is of more intense interest to Australia than any other portion of the Empire and the people ought not to be content with a formal official protest from Mr Bruce, but Australian public opinion should add its direct voice to that, of its constitutional leader. No more serious situation Jins confronted the Commonwealth since the day it had to consider the action it would take in the great war.

The ‘•Herald’’ in a leader, says were Australia to-day adequately populated, the Singapore base would still bo urgently needed for her defensive security. A full population lias never been to any country a guarantee against a warlike attack. What the MacDonald Government has decided is practically that the Pacific must be barred as an ocean for Britisli battleships in time of war, but the memories of what Gorman raiders might have done during the great war are too keen to permit us to sit easy wilder >uch a decision.

DEFENCE OF AUSTRALIA. SYDNEY, March 21.’ Speaking at the Federal Government banquet Mr Bruce, said that in leierciice to Singapore, all that lie asked was that the interests of the outlying portions of the Empire be not subordinated to problems near at band. He recognised it was impossible for Australia Ur assume the full burden of our defence. Safety lay in the closest co-operation with the British Navy. Britain in the past had carried the main burden of Empire defence, but owing to her .sacrifices in the war she was now unable to do so. Australia recognised Ibis and was prepared to render the fullest measure of assistance which her circumstances warranted. Mr Bruce reiterated bis views as stated in his reply to Mr MacDonald, concluding that while be deplored the decision arrived at, lie was prepared to continue to explore with tlio British Government all tlio ways by which world peace might be ensured and. a further reduction of armaments effected. Admiral Field, replying, referred to the- danger to commerce by raiders, in time of war. He .said it was most important to have ciuisers to protect the trade routes, also stressing the importance of Australia possessing tip to date cruisers. Those in the Australian Navy were coming to the end of thenlives. Admiral Field said he earnestly asked the Australian Government to consider replacing the present cruisers by a modern typo, able to protect toe trade routes. They knew it was not a time now to ask lor an expenditure more than Australia could afford hut the matter must be earnestly considered. The next best way for Australia to help was to consider the construction of one or more oversea patrol submarines.