The Daily News MONDAY, AUGUST 30. DEFENCE OF THE EMPIRE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 176, 30 August 1909, Page 2

The Daily News MONDAY, AUGUST 30. DEFENCE OF THE EMPIRE.

Mr. Massey, Leader of the Opposition, according to a telegram we publish this morning, is disappointed with th» results of the Empire Defence Conference. He expected that such questions as national training would have been disposed of by the Conference. It was hardly likely, seeing that the British Parliament—through the House of Lords—has only recently vetoed such a proposal, submitted by Lord Roberts, that any attempt would be made by the Conference to establish such a system in the dominions. The military side of the defence question i 6 obviously one to be settled by each of the dominions, and we believe that ere long national training wil.' lie the system adopted throughout Australasia. That the military aspect of defence was fully discussed by the Conference is known to everyone who ha= carefully read Mr. Asquith'e statement. We have been informed by cable that after the main Conference had been opened a foreign and offensive military conference was held at the War Office, and led to an agreement of certain fundamental principles. The substance of the experts' recommendations, which were subsequently endorsed by the Conference, was a recommendation that, without interfering with each dominion's complete control over the militaryforces raised within it, these forces should be standardised, the dominion's methods as regards the formation of units, arrangements for transport, pattern of weapons, etc., being as far as possible assimilated with those recently worked out for the British Army. The result, so far as the military side of the Empire's defence is concerned is, as Mv. lAsquith has pointed out, that the Conference approved a plan of so organising the forces of the Crown, wherever ,thcy ! are, that while preserving each dom'n-

I ion's complete autonomy, should the dominions desire to assist in the defence of the Empire i n a ease of real emergency, their forces can lie readily combined into one homogeneous Imperial Army. It was not for the Conference to dictate to New Zealand as to whether she should continue the voluntary or adopt a universal system of defence. That our land defence .will be re-organised 'n accordance with the rcommendations of the Conference is a certainty, but it remains witli our own people to say what system of service shall lie adopted. Mr. Massey further expresses his dissatisfaction with the idea of New Zealand's ''Dreadnought" gift being departed from, and a cruiser substituted. Here Mr. Massey is in error. The type of vessel to be presented to the British Navy by New Zealand and Australia iopresents the last word in naval evo'ution. Instead of a Dreadnought battleship, our contribution to the Navy is 'to be a Dreadnought-cruiser, a vessel that can out-gun and out-run practically any foreign battleship afloat. The great ai gument in favor of the Invincible type of cruiser is that she can either give or refuse fight; what slie cannot out-gun, she can out-run. Her armor is not quite fo thick as that of a Dreadnought battleship, but if pressed she can run away before serious trouble arrives. Aftor the Indomitable made her great nn across the Atlantic last year, the Paris ''Matin" expressed the opinion that si'! was "the only ship capa'ble of forcing an engagement or refusing to figlit. She greatly reduces the value of the armored - cruisers of all other navies. Owing to her heavier guns and greater protection, she could keep such a distance from the three best French, Japanese and American vessels of the same type, that while her own fire would be effective, she ► would be invulnerable to their fire. Indeed, the Indomitable could match herself against most uf the French and German battleships in commission, and is superior to some of the British." Last week Sir. McKenna, First Lord of the Admiralty, was reported to have stated that it would be possible to build cruisers faster and more powerful than the Invincible type. When it is pointed out. that a big cruiser of this type now building, the Indefatigable, is a levia ilinn oMH.OOO tons, 45,000 horse-power, with a nominal speed of 28 knots (a speed that will very likely be exceeded) and armed with light IJ-inch guns throwing a broadside of (JSOOlbs, it will , be realised that New Zealand's contribul tion to the navy represents the most | formida'ble type of vessel in the Navy. • Mr. Massey expresses "his decided opia- \ ion that had an offer not of a battleship \ but of an armored cruiser to be stationed in the Far East been made there would not have been such a chovu6 •>' approval." So far as we are aware there was never any idea of making conditions regarding the station of the gift vessel. That was left absolutely in the hands of the Admiralty, and surely it is extremely satisfactory that the two gift Dreadnought-cruisers are to he itationeil in our own waters. That Australia and Canada prefer, with financial assistance from the British Government, to build their own navies, is no ar«uincut why New Zealand should overreach herself. The people of the Dominion will, we are convinced, be perfectly satisfied that their contribution of 11100,000 per annum (or whatever additional amount may be voted) and the | interest charge on the Dreadnoughtcruiser, should be expended on the upkeep of the Navy in the Pacific waters, wherein our own destiny is centred. The j co-operation of the East Indies and China squadrons (portion of the latter being stationed in New Zealand) with the new Australian Navy—thus providing three formidable naval units in the Pacific—to say nothing of Canada's Xortli Pacific squadron, should ensure, for the present decade at least, the security of every British interest in the PacificsOceai*