Weekly journal-miner., 1910-03-09
THE MEYER BATTLESHIP.

Representative Tawney, chairman of the House committee on appropria- tions, objects to Secretary Meyer $ plan to build a 32,O0O-ton battleship. He bases his opposition on the grounds that there is nothing in the defen- sive needs of the nation to justify such a vessel, we being at peace with all the world; that, facing a deficit, the nation cannot afford the outlay, and, finally, that by building giant Dreadnoughts we should make ha1r our ordinary warships ineffective by comparison.
 These are not very sound reasons against the Meyer proposal, which only includes one ship. We are, in- deed. at peace, with no war in sight, but that signifies nothing of future security. In 1897 this country had a calm foreign outlook and the report of the Secretary of the Navy for that year advocated the building of one battleship only, thus completing, as he believed, the program which had supplied a new American war marine. Everywhere were sunny skies, but in a twelvemonth we were at war and bidding for armed ships in every mar ket of the world. As showing how suddenly wars arise, note also the visible beginnings, which did not cover three months, of the strife be- tween Russia and Japan. Generally speaking, wars come about unexpeet- edly. They rarely show themselves much beforehand, although suspicion may have been rife for longer time !; but when suspicion exists naval build ing has to be cautiously pursued, if ar all, lest it precipitate trouble which state departments are trying to solve The time to make ready for war is before it is talked about.
 As to the state of the public funds, rhe program with which Congress started, and which it is to be hoped the conference committees will keep in mind, was to build up a surplus of S35 5,OOO,O ,OOO. But even if that hope should not be realized, naval apprO- priation is still on the cards and it will make no difference in the effect on national finances whether the money goes in lump for one 32,0OO-ton ship or for two battleships of 10000 tons each and the usual complement of cruisers, torpedo craft, submarines and colliers.
 As to relegating to disuse half the present navy, it is no more to be ex- pected through the building of a greater Dreadnought by ourselves than by possible foes, all of whom are busy with like tasks. No matter how big the biggest ships of the navy may be the smallest in case of war will find plenty of enemies of their own class. During the Re bellion epoch our biggest frigates or ironelads did not limit the useful ness of the smaller ones The Olym- pia, in the battle of Manila, did not make the Boston or the Raleigh less effective against cruisers of their class. The converted yacht May flower, under Wainwright, at San tiago, was Outclassed by the whole fleet, yet it did excellent service against the Spanish torpedo-boat de- strOyers.
 MT. Tawney's plea cannot be taken seriously, but the arguments that the United States, being in the Dread nought game, should lead instead of follow; that the country ought to possess ships of war equal to the interests they are wanted to protect; that America can afford now and then to take money for smaller con struction to be put into larger; and that. as an advertisement for our shipbuilding facilities now under crit icism in Europe, a 32,OOO-ton Dread nought would be worth all it costs; these arguments, we say, are of a character to call to the support of the Meyer project the great weight of public opinion, MT. Tawney to the contrary notwithstanding.