DEFENCE OF THE EMPIRE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 87, 7 December 1912, Page 2

DEFENCE OF THE EMPIRE.

UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTED. (By Electric Telegraph,—Copyright.) (United Press Association.) Ottawa, December G. Sir Wilfrid Laurier congratulated Mr. Borden on his temperate manner of presenting the Bill. The Liberals were no less devoted to the Empire’s interests than the Conservatives.

The Liberals joined in singing “Rule Britannia,” and “God Save the King.” The evening press throughout the Dominion welcomes the policy. The Liberals are not criticising the policy, and it '-is not expected that there will be any material opposition in the House. HIGH COMMISSIONERS’ VIEWS. London, December 6.

Sir George Reid said that he hoped the Empire’s naval programme would soon include stations at various important points maintained by parts of the Empire to which they were adjacent. He hoped to see the North Pacific and Norm Atlantic patrolled by the Canadian fleet as the South Seas were patrolled by the Australian fleet. Other seas should be similarly patrolled, leaving Britain to take care of home and Mediterranean defence, with a largo share of the protection of trade routes. This would be in no sense weakening the Imperial force, but it was necessary for tire national growth. The Hon. T. Mackenzie said that Mr Borden’s action was right. He felt strongly that the time had arrived for the fifteen millions dwelling in territory outside the United Kingdom to have a voice in Imperial affairs. He was confident that British statesmanship would devise the paeans.

THE ADMIRALTY MEMORANDUM Ottawa, December 6. The Admiralty memorandum outlines the Dreadnought strength of Europe at the present time. Britain has eighteen, compared with nineteen possessed by other nations. In 1915 Britain would hare thirty-five, compared with fifty-one. Now that Britain is making special arrangements to send a portion of her fleets to co-oper-ate with the Australian navy and the China squadron, ,and to defend, if necessary, New Zealand, Australia, and British Columbia, with the growth of the German and other Powers’ navies this ability would be greatly restricted. A greater margin of British superiority would restore the mobility of the fleets and enable them to guard the distant .seas in the future as now. The debate has-been fixed for Thursday. S’/- 'I

OPINION IN LONDON. London, December 6. The press generally applauds Mr. Borden, although the ‘Daily News’ asifs whether there is- swell urgency, as requires. Canada to abandon her original idea of a Canadian navy, or whether the proposal furnishes ,relief to Britain. ‘Tire Times’ says that Mr. Borden’s speech is the first clear definition ever publicly, given by,a British statesman of the problem of Imperial security. With every succeeding year Britain’s relative naval power has steadily declined, but with the Dominion of a mind and method to he one, British power can he restored and maintained.

The ‘Daily Telegraph’ says that the speech confirms in the most complete manner the high hopes raised during Mr. Borden’s visit, and marks a turning point in the Empire’s history.

NEW ZEALAND WILL DO ITS DUTY. Lawrence, December G. At a public meeting to-night tin Hon. Mr. Massey read a cable respect ing the Canadian naval proposals. Canada, he said, had risen to the occasion in a mignificent manner. When Mr. Allen came back from Britain, the New Zealand Government would be able to disclose its policy from a naval point of view, and he asked the people to have patience until then, Canada had done its duty, Australia was doing its duty, in its own way, and it remained for New Zealand to do its duty. It might cost more money, but if the Government found it necessary to ask the people for more money for the purpose of naval defence he was certain that the people would respond in a manner worth’- of themselves, and worthy of the occasion. THE TERRITORIALS. London, December 6. Mr. Seely, addressing the LondonScottish Regiment, defended the Territorials. The people had a deep-seat-ed objection to compulsory service. An attempt to base the defence system upon compulsory enlistment would be madness. Even if compulsion were possible it would take years to pro vide an efficient engine of war. The Government had not the slightest intention of adopting it, but would foster the volunteer principle to the utmost. It was proposed to complete the organisation of the national reserve, which was now 170.000 men. He hoped that all patriots would abandon a barren controversy for a joint valuerarv national service.

THE POLICY’S RECEPTION. (Received 8.35 a.m.) Ottawa, December 6. Messrs Tapper, Ross, and other lending ,statesmen enthusiastically P vonr the new policy. Mr* Pupper declares that he did not expect unyt; in; so generous. The Admiralty memor andum points out that in the sprin of 1915, Britain will have 25 Dread noughts and Germany 17. The large: margin of strength will give greatei freedom to British fleets in every sea

and will increase the security and diminish the possibility of attack. British fleets were predominant in 1900 in every sea, but were now predominant nowhere, except in the North Sea, and this despite the greatly increased expenditure on naval defence. In order to secure safety in Home waters, the Overseas had been denuded of ships. IS THERE REAL PERIL? (Received 10.20 a.m.) Ottawa, December G. The Liberal press, after further consideration of the Naval policy, is developing hostility on the ground that there is no real peril to the Empire justifying large expenditure. The papers further state that if the peril existed a gift of Dreadnoughts would bo fully approved by both parties. (Received 7,9.1 b a.m.) London, December G.

The ‘Westminster Gazette’ reciprocates Mr. Borden’s hope to make a practical start in a real partnership. The controversy whether the battleships will be extras or an aid to British taxpayers is meaningless and derogatory, and a poor compliment to Canada if regarded as mere appanage to the British fleet. The ‘Manchester Guardian’ says colonial representation on the Defence Committee might make a very serious breach. The theory of executive responsibility to Parliament and its representatives might easily become the controlling power behind the Cabinet’s Naval Foreign policy.