Rangitikei Advocate TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8738, 12 February 1907, Page 2

Rangitikei Advocate TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES

1 Eveby citizen o£ the Empire must i fssl the greatest concern as to the efficiency ol the British fleet and its capacity to meet the naval forces of any possible hostile combination of powers. As wo read of the large proposed additions to foreign navies and listen to pessimistic forecasts from so-called experts we cannot but wonder whether the long established naval supremacy of Britain is being sacrificed to false ideas of economy. Mr Arthur Lee, a Civil Lord of the Admiralty in tbs late administration, daring the debate on the shipbuilding vote last July said-: “Tbs first country that completed a fleet of I Dreadnoughts would ipso facto secure I the undisputed command of the sea. We were bound, if wo intended to retain our naval supremacy, to retain a supremacy in ships ot the new type. la the immediate future we would only have sevexi ships of the new type laid down, as against six by France, three by Germany and three by the United States. In the new type, therefore, we would fall far below the two-Power standard.” The New Zealand Times echoes the same idea when it says “we cannot but regard it as unwisdom in a British Government to do what the present Government has done, to relax oven for a year its efforts to keep the fleet at the full necessary strength relatively to the navies of other nations." It ought to be perfectly easy fo ascertain if these statements are founded on facts and fortunately some letters from Sir William White have recently appeared in the London Times which give perfectly clear information on the subject. Sir William White was, until a few years ago, director of naval construction for the British navy. He has designed more battleships than anyone else in the world, and can speak with absolute authority as to rate of building ships in England and elsewhere. Moreover, he is not a politician, and must have the interests of the navy deeply at heart.

. Sir William White states: “As regards the new type of battleship wo have already one at sea, two afloat and to be finished before April, 1908, and three about to be begun, | which, according to official etatej inents, could be completed early in | 1909. At the latter date the Eoyal Navy will possess a squadron of sis | completed battleships of the most | modem type. In addition, by May, 1908, it is intended to complete three great armoured cruisers of the Invincible type, which are said to be of unprecedented speed, to equal in armament the most powerful foreign battleships, but to be weaker in defence than those vessels. This fleet | of nine ships will represent an aggreI gate expenditure of fully 14£ millions I sterling, and will be available for service early in 1909.” Turning to Germany it is said “ the essential facts to bo borne in mind are that up to date no start has been made in building the two new German battleships and the armoured cruiser to which Mr Arthur Lee referred ; that

I progress upon them will necessarily be teas rapid because they are pioneer vessels of new types, for which new : 1 designs of gun-mountings and 1 machinery will be required; and that ; the German authorities deliberately assign three years as the period of construction instead of two years as in Britain, arranging their finance accordingly. Consequently the earliest date at which those three ships are likely to be completed for service is the middle of 1909, before which I time the Eoyal Navy will possess the I nine powerful ships named above.” | In France, of the six proposed ships, ■ two are to be built in the national I dockyards, four by contract. No contract has yet been placed, and no ship laid down. The total expenditure on these battleships will exceed £11,000,000.* During 1906 less than £70,000 was spent on all six ships, whereas in 1911 about £920,000 will have to be spent. It is hoped that the two dockyard ships may be ready for service at the end of 1910. The middle of 1911 is the anticipated date

of completion for tbo remaining four vessels. In view of past events, the many new features embodied in tbe designs, and tbe present financial position in France, it is hardly likely that these dates will be kept. Finance is really the determining factor. Space forbids us to deal with the programmes of the United States and Japan.

Sik William White thus summarised tbe situation: ■“ From tbe foregoing statements it will be seen that early in 1909 the Royal Navy will possess six modern battleships and three heavily-armed armoured cruisers, all complete and ready for service. No other European navy will have any completed ships of corresponding class, nor will the American navy

have any. At the end of 1909 Germany may have two battleships and one large cruiser available, and the United States two battleships. At the end of 1910—if only two battleships areJaid down in 1907, as stated by Mr Robertson—we should possess eight completed battleships and three cruisers of tbo most recent types; Germany would have four battleships and two cruisers; Franco two. battleships; and. the United , States two or possibly three battle-

ships. This summary, based on the latest authentic information, disposes completely of the contention of Mr Arthur Lee and others that, ) if the new type of battleship alone is considered, we shall, in the immediate future • • • rail far below the two-Power standard.’ That contention, when examined closely, is seen to rest on a fundamental misconception ; it treats ships which are. ‘ projected ’ or ‘ laid down ’ as governing factors in comparisons of naval force ; and does not take account of the fact that until ships are complete and ready for service tjjmy do not count in estimates of relative power. Possible or probable dates of completion are essential to fair comparisons, and these dates are determined generally by financial conditions rather than by shipbuilding resources.”