Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-04-01

on the earth? What is the view of the
Senator with reference to that? Ir
order that we may have some oppor-
tunity to estimate for the future, are
we simply to provide a navy to protect
our coast efficiently in time of war fol
our defense, and such additional navy
as may be necessary for represent: tives
in different parts of the world for the
protection of commercial interests, etc.
Shall that be the basis of limitation, or
on the other hand, shall we go on and
Regulate our conduct in tine enlarge
ment of our Navy in proportion as
other nations may see fit to enlarge
theirs? What is the view Of the Sena-
tor with reference to the particular
controlling interest which shall be our
guide in the future?
MIR. HALE. Well, Mr.. President,
that is an entirely pertinent question.
I do not know how l would answer it.
I certainly do not think that we need to
be put into any such attitude as Great
Britain takes boldly and avowedly, and
that is that she will, no matter how
much it costs, have navy bigger than
any other two powers. Great Britain
does not deny that; it was brought out
l
naval budget. Great Britain made that
an essential pOstulate of her whole
doctrine about navy
| Now, | do not think that we need that.
IbecauSc our situation is entirely different
| If we had not any foreign possessions
and were ut home. as the Japanese are.
we have all the Navy now that we would
need for any. purpose. But we have got
| these possessions. l shall be glad to get
| ri1 of them. If We can: but as long as we
have them we must have navy conmen-
suratc with protecting them if trouble
| arises.
Mr.. BACON The Senator, then. as /
understand it. gives it as his opinion that
| the enlargement of the Navy beyond its
present proportions is made necessary
been enlarged by what is popularity known
as our new possessions"
| Mr.. HALE. 1 think that is the great
factor. When you come to the last addi-
large one, that undoubtedly is the largest
| factor.
Mr. BACON. Now, if the Senator will
pardon me, l want to ask him another
question. OF course it is recognized,
when we speak about a navy that is suff-
| cient for the protection of our commerce.
We do not i'll that contemplate that we
| shall at each place have a naval force
which will be sufficient to meet any naval
| force which might be brought against it.
| That is not what we have i'll view. 1t
simply means that we shall have in differ
cnt sections the ships which will be nee
esSary to support the authority of the
Navy in the protection of its citizens in
| caS" of an emergency.
Mr.. HALE. We are very. differently
| situated from England in that regard.
We have not very much foreign shipping.
Mr.. BACON. am glad the Senator
states that as his opinion. That is per
tinent consideration in the question l am
| about to ask, which is this: Taking that
| as the particular function and Office OF
our ships in foreign waters. ana then con-
| Sidcring the needs we have for Il navy
for the defense of our harborS and coast,
| is it or is it not the opinion of the Senator
| that. those two things considered. the
present size of the Navy is ample for the
needs of the Government?
| Mr.. HALE. | will say We have not I'M
| luckily. much merchant marine engaged
| in foreign trade: aud it Is growing small
| IT ut that. Great Britain'S foreign trade
| is enormous. increasing all the time all
over the globe. We have not that consid-
| Grafton. ~
We have these possessions, which we
| nave got to protect and We have this
| new enterprise, for which everybody has
| guaranteed us az sponsor-the great 18TH
mian canal We must have a military
| a military torce-it is all military. Army
and Navy We have got to have navy
| that is ample if any trouble arises there,
| to protect that canal, and we Will always
have. Great Britain has had great pride
| N her Mediterranean fleet. and as the
| wears; goes by. our main fleet will be in
| southern waters. That is one of the
| things which adds to the necessity of a
| great deal larger navy than We had ten
| years ago, when we neither had the fht-
ippincs, nor Guam, nor Porto Rico, nor
| Hawaii nor the isthmian canal on our
| hands. But without all of those posses
| 'ions. we need Il comparatively small
| navy. -
| and will not DE Il
matter which will require so large an in
| crease of the Navy as. is required by
| those far-distant possessions Am cor
| rect in that suggestion
| Mr. HALE. No; | think on the other
hand. if any trouble arose. If we mad
any war with any great European power
we would require larger fleet OF fEht-
sne vessels down there than We would i'll
the Philippines.
| Mr. BACON Yes: but I am speaking
now of the fact that they are near to us
and that the same ships we nave at
home are available.
| Mr. HALE Yes: we do not need many
ships for mere home protection: olr
nome port cities are largely protected by
IfortihCat ions and with the modern guns
and Qualifications which have been buiit
and are now building it is supposed that
no hostile fleet will ever b" able to destroy
our cities; and with the line Of harhnr-
| lcfcns,. vessels we have got We are pretty
| well equipped in that regard.
| Mr. BACON. If the Senator Will par
Ion me for asking one other question. |
was very much struck with the statement
Of the Senator AS to the deSirabiiity OF
| the ship of the pattern of the oregon
rather than the ship of 5000 tons burden
| understand from the statement OF the
Senator. that he regards the smaller type
las fully as efficient as fighting machine
as the larger ship. If am correct in my
l understanding, this bill carries pro
| vision for the construction OF lb,oW-ton
| ships.
Mir HALE, For one.
Mr. BACON For one. That involves
4 difference of some S3.W0.oo0 in cost. Ii
| understand correctly the opinion Of the
| senator without being any more cfhclcnt
las II fighting vessel Now. of course. the
| senator has a good reason for 1t. know.
land I simply desire to ascertain what that
| reason is Why is it, with the views
Tho Senator has in that matter. that ne
| retains tic provision for the l6."o toli
| shin rather than substitute provision
Tor n ship of the pattern of the Oregon
| Mr. HALE. | offered that last year ana
| rouid not succeed; and as the program
mas been cut down from five battle ships
to one and We inserted mot more thS'h
n oo0 tons, ! am willing to leave it to the
secretary of the Navy to determine that
MIR BACON. 1t is not required that
this vessel shall be 5000 tons, but That Is
the limitation. . T.,
4 n