Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-03-12

WE WANT NAVY THAT CAN FI0Hr AND WITH
WHICH WE CAN PROTECT OUR crrrzESs-THIs
WILL COST doSEr-oRKArSEss OF ENaLAND's
NAVAL POWER.
''The essay published in Truth Of March over
| the signature of ex-senator John J. Ingalls,, on
the usclessness Of navy to the United States, is
one that he ought to be very much ashamed Of
that is, if he claims to be an honest well-in-
formed man." said Capt. Richard W. Meade to
writer for The STAR. 1T is difficult for me
to conceive how q man Of such long experience
in public life as Mr.. ingalls, has had should
deliberately impale himself on one horn or the
other Of the dilemma he is in, of being re-
garded by right-thinking men either as a
demngogue or An ignoramus.
"dis assertion that between 1861 and 1865 the
United States created large naval force is un-
deniably true. But ex-senator Ingalls,, OF all
men, ought to know that the conditions of 1851
and those of 1891 are vastly different. In
lS6O-6l the sails Of American commerce whit
ened every sea; the merchant steam feet of the
country was second only TO that of Great
Britain and when the tocsin Of war sounded
hundreds of merchant officers and thousands Of
our sea militia hocked to the service OF the
navy, while every available vessel in the mer-
chant marine was pressed into use. The south,
not having any maritime strength whatever,
was utterly unable to break the blockade and
with all its energy and undeniable pluck could
not put ahoat more than six cruisers. Ietwhat
those six cruisers did in the way of damage to
US Mr.. ingalls, explains when he himself men,
tons the TACT that Great Britain compromised
on $1,000, 900 in payment OF the scot.
THE CONDITIONS OF TO-DAY.
"What are the conditions today? Where are
the ships engaged in commerce upon which the
United States could reckon in the event Of war
with foreign nation possessing navy? The
world has moved and the ships that made good
cruisers and blockaders in 1S61-65 would be as
utterly useless against the foreign foe today as
Columbus ship Of discovery. England alone has
ing vessels Of all types. These ships can fight.
Have we anything to oppose to them ? The pur-
pose OF a navy being defense and attack what
is the use OF navy that cannot fight? Some
say that England will not attack us. This may
be true. Her interest in our welfare may be
even greater than we seem to feel ourselves.
That brilliant young meteor in literature, Rud-
yard hll ling, says that the United States is a
chartered hDertine,' and that England will do
nothing, no matter what the United States may
do. Indeed, 1 think myself that the confisca-
ton OF English property in the United States
would be the only set-off we should have against
the indemnities levied on our seaports py Eng
lands feet. But will some other power regard
us thus? Will 1t not rather be az Eipling says,
cash or crashY
WE WANT NAVY TO FIGHT.
1.-THE Constitution of the United States pro-
vides for the maintenance Of navy. What kind
of navy? One to fight or one to run? For
my part desire one that may be able to fight
and to fight to some purpose. To have such a
navy we must spend some money. 1.-THE OF
the enormous sums that ex-senator Ingalls, has
helped to vote away under the pretext of PEN
sions would have built this navy long ago. Be
cause we have no navy worth mentioning, is
the navy ITSELF mean the men who do the
fighting when it comes to that-responsible?
trow not The causes lie elsewhere and are
not far to seek. Mr.. ingalls, intimates that we
don't want any navy and that no one will at
tack us. He might as we'll say that because the
people of Washington are as a rule well be-
hayed we need no police force. 1t will be neces-
sary to maintain police until the mil
lennian era arrives, and the fact that other ma
lions are prepared while we are defenseless is
sufficient reason for our building proper navy
to maintain our rights and our honor if as
sailed. Does the ex-senator love his flag or
does he not, and if it should be wantonly as
sailed what would he advise us to do about it?
1t won't do to say that these things can't hap
pen. They can happen, and q far wiser man
than Mr.. Ingalls, is authority for the saying,
'C'est toujours lmprevu qui arrive
KNaLAND's POWER.
SIT suits Mr.. ingalls, to sneer at England 8
power, but it is very certain at all events that
she fully protects her citizens, which l regret
to say this country does not always do. Only
the other day revolution broke out in Chill
and long before any other power could get a
ship to the scene of conquest England had a
squadron under Admiral lothian of the coast.
We have no reason to love England and mnch
that Mr.. Ingalls, says Of her treachery to us in
the late civil war is true. But as power there
has been none equal or approaching to her
since Rome was ruled by the first Of the
Casars''