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

NAVAL QUESTION

LORD BEATTY’S VIEW,

Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.]

LONDON, July 2

Referring to Singapore Base, Earl Beatty, in the House of Lords said that was not yet finished, but without it we should be helpless to'protect our Empire and trade in the Far East and India. By 1933 Franco would, possess 24 submarines and a flotilla of ,2200 to. 2500 tons, with 5.5. inc bguns, whereas we should have practical .equality. What possible chance should we have of maintaining our food supplies and vital commodities against such strength possessed.liy a Mediterranean power.

Lord expressed the-1 idlest possible agreement with Earl Beatty. Lord Parmoor, replying for the Government, said that they had just as great care and anxiety for the security of thc country as , any other Government. The changed world conditions were sufficient to explain why 50 cruisers would give us in 1930 security for which 70 cruisers were desirable in 1927. He believed that the great mass of the people of this country desired this Treaty and <a:,policy of the fullest undertakings with tlie United States,,., and they arc prepared to feel secure so long,as they knew that no step was taken, except under the , advice of expert advisers for the. time being; on the ..Board .of the Admiralty.... •■•O -■’

ARE NAVAL LORDS CONVINCING?

LONDON,. July-3.!

“The Times,” in an editorial„ : isa.y.s: “ The speeches of Lord Beatty and Lord Jellicoe must increase • our anxiety about our meagre allowance of cruisers, but they will not persuade tbe great bulk of responsible opinion tlmt the elimination of competitive building between ourselves, tbe United States and Japan was not such a great benefit that it. justified the Government in accepting the treaty. The House of Lords naval debate will have an excellent effect if it impresses the nation with the necessity of vigilance tq; ensure that -our construction does not lag behind the Treaty standard. 1 Mr Alexander’s 1930 programme is unsatisfactory, especially as it will not lie seriously begun until 1931.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19300704.2.52

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 4 July 1930, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
331

NAVAL QUESTION Hokitika Guardian, 4 July 1930, Page 6

NAVAL QUESTION Hokitika Guardian, 4 July 1930, 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