The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-05-21
BAT TTLESH|PS ID BE BUILT EACH YEAR Naval Policy of the Demo-
 cratic House FEWER THAN USUAL Democrats Opposed to Large Navy and Think Two Dread- {,
 naughts Per Year Are
 Too Many
By JONATHAN WINFIELD

Washington, May 20.-(Special.)- .)-One
 new battleship per annum hereafter is to be the naval policy of the democratic house.
 The democ,Rts propose to break away
 from the poiMy of President Roosevelt l and President Taft. who have been firm in their recommendations that the gov ernment shall appropriate for two new dreadnaughts each year.
 There are two reasons for this decision on the part of those who will be responsi- ble for the next naval appropriation bill. In the first place, the democrats base their policy on the milder term of "an adequate navy
 The majority of the democrats for several years past, have voted against two battle ships as recommended by the house naval affairs committee. Representative Padgett of Tennessee,
 now chairman of the naval committed, has always led the fight for only one dreadnaught. He has been outvoted, however, time and time again by the re- publicans, and few of his own party, some of whom believe not only in two but In three new battleships each year. The rank and file of the democrats,
 however, march under the one battleship banner. Representative Padgett, in his
 present position of authority, will shape the naval bill in committee to conform to the democratic idea of retrenchment in naval expansion.
 In the second place, the democrats need the revenue. The looping off of one battleship per year means big annual saving. The dreadnaught of today costs, when completely fitted out, nearly $12.- 100000. Even without It's armament, the newer type battleships cannot be built for less than $7,0Q0000, and members of the naval affairs committee give as a total cost the conservative estimate of $11 ,000,000 to $12,000,000.
 The enactment of the farmers free list bill the democrats figure, will take more than s10,000 900 from the customary reve- nues of the government. The democrats believe that this amount will be recoup- ed many times in a reduction in the cost of living, but at the same time, 1t is wise to have something tangible to take the place of the s1o.0oo.ooo thus wiped out by the democrats first step in tariff revision.
 Therefore, the democrats have balanced the ledger. If the free list bill means a loss of s10,000,000 in revenue. then the saving or one DdIIleSnlp per year InednS the regaining of that revenue. There is in addition a cumulative cost of maintaining battleship that would
 go to the right side of the democratic ledger. The average yearly cost of oper- ating a f1rst-class dreadnaught will total at least $50,000. It costs nearly a mill lion dollars per year to keep the Con- necticut af1oat. This annual cost in- cludes the salaries of officers and men, tha fir as well as ammunition and the wear and tear of the big guns.
 In line with the democratic reasoning, the government will save not only the first cost of the vessel. but Uncle Sam
 may put in his pockets each year nearly
 million dollars that you'd have been
 required had an additional battleship
 been ordered.
 Of course the democratic programme
 Is bound to meet with bitter opposition,
 not only in the House and Senate, but
 perhaps on the part of the administra-
 ton itself. For many years. the United
 States has been committed to a larger navy. Two battleships per annum have been appropriated for with great regu-
 arity. President Roosevelt was in favor of at least this number, and would have increased 1t had he received any encour- agement from Congress.
 The two-battleship programme has been supported in fairly consistent manner by the republican party. The regular in- crease has annually gone through the senate alm0se without struggle, and the fight In the house has always been won overwhelmingly by those who fla vored a big navy.
 The question of naval increase, how over, has not been divided strictly along partisan lines. Representative Hobson, a democrat. is at variance with the ma jority of his party over its naval policy. Mir Hobson each year makes futile effort to secure the authorization for three battleships, or four, as the case may be. He Is a member of the naval affairs committee of the house and one of the liveliest fights in the history of that committee will occur when MT. Hobson runs up against the one-battle- ship programme of Representative Pad gett, and his colleagues on the commit tee who decline to be alarmed over the probability of war.
 The United States now ranks third among the naval powers of the world. England comes first, Germany second. France fourth and Japan fifth If the United States should adhere to the one battleship per year programme, however, navy experts estimate that this country will be outstripped by both France and Japan within the next decade, taking into consideration the probability that neither of these nations will curtail their navies
 The tonnage of the various navies, built and now under course of construc- ton. Is given as follows:
 England 2.173,SSs Germany. 963.s45; United States, 824,152; France, 725,231; Japan, 493,671: Russia. 401, 46S:- Italy, 327,- 059; Austria. 2O9,S99. The above was the relative order of warship tonnage, al- ready afloat or contracted for, when the house passed the current naval appro- priation bill three months ago.
 England has 8 -dreadnaughts and 49 first-class battleships at present, with 10 additional dreadnaughts building. Ger many has 4 dreadnaughts. and p firs6 class battleships. with dreadnaughts in course Of construction. The United has ships. with c building. France has 17 naughts and 6 battleships under construc- tleships and one additional battleship au- thorized or under construction.
 RegardIessi of the naval programmes of other nations, the United States pro- bably will trail along hereafter with one new dreadnaught per year. unless the war cloud should become so omnibus as to scare the House committee, hence, when the naval affairs bill Is reported next time. 1t Is expected that Repre- sentative Padgett will serve notice that vii, he the permanent policy of his com mittee to allow appropriations for but one new ship per year.
 The Senate may object to this. but the
 h.