The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-04-29
THEY SAT ON HIM.


 sition should satisfy that worthy that his spreadeagle ideas of American gov- ernment are not favorably received by that body. The vote was in no respect a partisan one. for while all the Dem ocrats but four voted against the amendment providing for four instead of two ships, they were largely sus- tained by the Republican Senators. and we suppose the President will make no further attempt to force his big navy demands on Congress. at least during the present session.
 In this connection 1t is interesting to refer to a speech made by Senator Hale of Maine in which he very plainly showed that all this tremor and blus- ter about the need of more and bigger war vessels is without cause or foun- dation. He showed that with the war vessels now in service and those now building. added to the two that the present Congress has provided for. we will have thirty-one battleships and fifteen armored cruisers, and that we have no cause for fear or worry over, the subject of war with foreign pow CTS or apprehend any danger from any other nation. Some portions of his speech are not only interesting. but instructive. and we copy the following as matter of information. Referring to the actual figures he said: It shows a navy so large that you may divide it in two, and a larger navy will be left on the Pacific coast than the entire fleet that Is now malx ing its way up that coast, and another great fleet very considerably larger, with all of the smaller ships connect ed with 1t, more than thirty in all, making an immense home squadron. if l may use that phrase as apphed to the Atlantic fleet rather than the Pa cific. although they are both actually 1t will leave on the Atlantic coast as our f1eet facing toward Europe a much larger fleet than that which is now in Pacific waters and 1t will leave In Pa clfic waters for the protection of the Pacific coast, which I acknowledge we ought to protect, another fleet larger than the entire fleet that is now upon that coast.
 We would have fifteen big battle ships on the Pacific, the same number that are now in the fleet; we would have sixteen big battleships in the Att lantic. and we would have seven enor- nous cruisers as large as battleships in the Pacific, and eight more on the Atlantic and in addition to all that we would have all of the monitors. all of the protected cruisers, and all of the over 2000
 I do not think there is any squadron AH Lon aatI |. I. squadron In her home ports that is as large as the squadron we will then have, or the fleet. whatever you may call 1t. In the Pacific. So the Senators deslrous of protecting their own coasts, need have no apprehension that if the program sent to us from the House Is carried out they will be left in the lurch.
 We do not copy the detailed list of war vessels presented by the Senator. but only give the aggregate power wc now have on the ocean, or will have very soon. We have no doubt that these figures will be something of revelation to most readers. who have heard and read so much hot air about our naval weakness that they have probably wondered how our govern ment has So long escaped capture. but We confess that we were somewhat surprised to see the statement that some of the Senators themselves were not aware of the actual strength ~f our navy.
 Wo agree with The Washington Her ald that the Senator made a perfect answer to the assertion that either the Atlantic or the Pacific coast is without adequate naval protection. and that 1t is necessary to embark on a program of naval construction that win increase the battleship fleet to forty eight ships of the line. The fact is that with our twenty-five completed battleships we are fit for naval warfare with any na- tion. except Great Britain and possibly Germany two powers with which con fiict is about as far removed as war with the Martians. MT. Hobson would have us maintain a navy more than the equivalent of England's fifty-odd bat tleships. The more moderate big navy men urge that we should keep pace with or ahead of Germany in naval strength, but why should 1t be thought the height of naval wisdom to regard as a possible enemy one of our best friends among the nations? Or that we should match ourselves against Germany in shipbuilding contest. while Great Britain is and will always remain the preponderant naval power? It would appear that. if our ambition is to become dominant Instead of merely independent power as we have been in the past. Mir. Hobson has logic on his side.
 But the war talk all squints at Ja- pan. and respecting that rising power Mir. Hale's figures show that we are fully prepared for any naval adventure in the Pacific we may see fit to engage In. This being the case, what becomes of tue hullabaloo about the danger of a Japanese invasion of our Pacific lit toral, or the silly and unpatriotic inti- nations that we are about as helpless as China? What of the invitation to aggression upon an opulent nation im-