The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1908-04-13
MONDAY. APRIL 10. 1903.
American Naval Policy.

We reprint elsewhere the words of
truth and soberness uttered by Theodore
E. Burton, Of Ohio. in dissent from the
grandiose theories of naval policy ex-
plotted by Richmond Pearson Hobson.
These theories might be dismissed as
fanciful and absurd II they were wholly
the product of Mr.. Hobsons brain, but
they bear a close resemblance to the
brand of conversation handed out from
high quarters. as we'll as TO the big navy
talk wherewIth Mr.. Taft, our President
apparent, has regaled his audiences while
swinging round the circle. We mean
10 say that Mr.. Hobson has been album
dainty coached by the highest naval
authority. and that. therefore. what he
has said gains more consequence than
1t otherwise would have.
When the battle-ship fleet was ordered
TO the Pacific. last summer, this paper
pointed out that the order signlfed the
beginning Of a revolution in American
naval policy-a revolution directed wholly
by Executive authority, to which the
assent Of Congress has been but par
TALLY secured. That this was the cor
rect Interpretation Of that orders signifi-
canoe IS now universally admitted. Near
" every speaker on the naval appropria-
ton bill has dweit on the new departure
IN our naval policy. Mr. Foss, chairman
OF the Naval Committee, says that we
are no longer building up navy for
defense. but for aggressive Offense, and
that We must have a two-ocean navy,
FTy-rF
present fleet. Mr.. Bartholdt, in an adj
mirable address. declared that tie pres
ent naval programme is in contraven-
ton Of the American naval policy as
agreed upon up 10 a year ago. And Mr.
Padgett showed clearly that we have
come 10 the parting of the ways in naval
policy. and that the decision of Con-
gress will be a momentous one. Mr..
HObson, as everybody knows. is the
drummer boy of the naval revolution,
and there are not battle ships enough
on the seven seas TO satisfy his love
OF martial glory.
On what ground is this extraordinary
change in naval policy asked for, and
justified? Why has it suddenly become
necessary to double, or more than double
the size of the navy? Mr. Hobson, we
have no doubt, gives the reasons cor
reetly. We are a weak nation. he says.
IN danger of aggression from Europe. and
especially from Asia. I'VE are within
reasonable distance" he asserts, "of the
point where this nation may have to
fight for its very existence" We are
surrounded on every side by tradition
al and implacable enemies. The hordes
Of Asia are filled with the lust OF cor
quest, which they would satiate on
American shores. The trained armies Of
Europe are waiting an opportunity to
invade and capture our coast cities Mr..
Burton codly dissipates this fantastic
nightmare with two short sentences:
The fundamental fsilacy IN all these arguments
is that in this day neither an individual nor nation
IS safe unless he goes armed. Jast the contrary Is
true"
L IS the fundamental fallacy Of all the
big-navy talk. It is the fundamental
fsllacy underlying Capt Mahans pIau-
sible reasonings in favor Of the develop
ment of American sea power Naval
strategists assume, as theoretically they
must, that enemies encompass US on every
side; that aggression is the normal pol
Icy of every modern state; that war
fare Is inevitable. Just the contrary. as
Mr. Burton observes, is true. Mr.. Hob
son tells US lie is stating plain facts;
he is, in reality, talking pure nonsense.
Yet there is an administration in mower
swayed by just that sort OF argument.
and Congress is paying the bills.