The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1927. NAVAL DEFENCE.

Hokitika Guardian, 25 June 1927, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1927. NAVAL DEFENCE.

The British proposals submitted to the Conference with regard to Naval defence have been described as remarkuYe for their extreme frankness. The British delegation in the words of Laid Jellicoe, have placed “all their cards oil the table.” making a precise statement of the why and the wherefore. The British Navy, it has been made plain, is essential for the trade routes of the Empire. The British Empire is far-flung, and the Overseas Dominions could not exist as nations unless there was a guarantee for secure overseas trading. The development of the distant parts of the Empire, it has been shown by experience, rests upon intimate trade with the Motherland. This means the transport of produce over great maritime distances, and the safety of the route must he - secure and beyond doubt. Be know the oxperience of the overseas countries when the world was in a state of war. The produce of the countries and the food supplies generally had to be expensively convoyed or suffer serious loss from raiders. The destruction at sea in that

respect was enormous, and Britain relying so much on food supplies earned l,y water, "as in the most clangorous predicament of any of the belligerents, t treat Britain, saw to it that the sea routes were policed to the best advantage by the Navy, and in. policing the seas as Great Britain did, an immense service was dune to other countries whose shipping also had a great measure of protection. The experience ot those serious times, so ievent as to he fresh in the minds if all, is surely warrantry enough for Britain to 711:1 i 11tiiin an ample Navy. Lord Jellieoe lias stated the ease very frankly mi' l tlie nation will pay nttciitinn to hl» vii. A.-,. relying as it does so much on his proved capacity to speak with authority on the .subject which lie has made his life's work. As regards the limitation of armaments, Britain has o.Tered a very serious suggestion in the proposal to limit the size of battleship- the chief 'engines of destruction. In the same way other classes <f naval strength would be reduced also, thus giving an earnest of the views for practical limtation. What Britain states in-this connection is sure to attract much attention. For reasons given already, it is obvious Britain must have a strong and ellcctivc navy, and any proposals for a reduction from that quarter is .surely seine guarantee of good faith; hut the reduction can he made only with a proportionate (ompliance of other Naval Powers whose dominance of the sea

Britain must take into account. Safety first is a matter of the highest importance for Great Britain in regard to naval defence, and it follows before any reduction of strength is decided upon, tho other Powers must conform also to the general proposals which in tho end is intended to have a real and lasting effect on the world’s peace. Tt is a fact that the chief danger of war does not come from the (treat Powers (outside of Russia) but from the smaller nations. In Europe this L so specially. On that account Navies of indefinite strength are not essential. It is a reasonable and feasible proposition to control and restrict Navy building 'programmes by the Great Powers, and for that reason the British proposals give promise of useful possible developments. Naturally they will require time for examination. This is a matter which the other nations cannot he expected to lightly or hurriedly determine. But those who are sincere in this matter will ponder the position with care and consideration, and the upshot should be great appreciation of the British proposals and their ultimate adoption by the other Powers concerned.