IMPERIAL DEFENCE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXV, Issue 69, 29 March 1913, Page 5

IMPERIAL DEFENCE.

THE NAVAL DEBATE.

DANGER TO THE TRADE ROUTES

(By Electric. Telegraph.—Copyright.) (United Press Association.) . ■ London, March 28. In the House of Commons the naval debate is proceeding. Mr Arthur Hamilton Lee (Hants) said wo were too often obsessed by thh North Sea peril, and did not pay sufficient attention to the trade routes of /the outlying Empire. We were now running a grave risk in concentrating the legions to defend the heart of the Empire. The safety of the outer marches was almost as important as the safety of the. North Sea. The margin of safety was too small. Two keels to one were imperative, , Mr Churchill admitted that the battleship New Zealand was included in the vessels composing the 10 to 10 standard of superiority, but the othei

dominions gifts were not included. Lord Charles Beresford commended

the arming of merchantmen, wfjich were together worth more than fifteen dreadnoughts. The real danger was not invasion, but starvation. Mr Kier Hardie declared that Britain was not playing the game fairly with Germany by omitting the colonial ships from the GO per cent standard. THE HOLIDAY PROPOSAL. i . (" Berlin, March 28. The press generally regard the naval holiday' proposal as Utopian. Some assert it is intended to enable British shipyards to overtake arrears. It would mean closing Uerman yards, where there is a dearth of work. THE CHILDREN OF OVERSEAS. (Received 8.5 a.m.) London, March 28.' Viscount Haldane (Lord Chancellor) at Carton Hall said: “No one ever yet succeeded in raising a compulsory force side by side with a voluntary force, We cannot, with the Empire as it is, afford to take, risks. When the Overseas are able to take their own share in the burden, and are able to look after their weaker neighbours, the whole cpVestion may be considered.”