The Washington times., 1913-02-23
A TRUE PLAN OF NAVAL ECONOMY.

whether it favqrs authorization of two battleships,
or only one, in this years naval appropriation BILL
The debate will travel the DID, familiar ground
that has been covered year after year in this dis
| cusson of the very fundamental of our whole ma
tional defense policy.
This country does not now, and never did, at
tempt to maintain an army comparable to those Of
Europe. Our isolation is a guarantee of certain
security. But the very reason which makes it un-
necessary to provide great army, does dictate that
we should maintain 6rst-cIass navy. Our isolation
would be no assurance of safety if were not pre-
pared to oppose any naval force that might reason
ably be expected to be launched against shores.
The canal, large responsibilities in all three
Americas, and our interests in the east all dictate
vigorous naval program. -
Against this is placed the futile argument of
economy. 1t is an argument that doesn't argue. The
conditions which we need navy to meet are not
of our own making. They are imposed on US from
the outside 1t is senseless to talk about the wild
race of naval expansion and to assume that for us
to drop out of that race will discourage our COM
petitors. Rather it would be to yield the victory
them; to concede that the one nation best able to
maintain navy was willing to prejudice its place
among the powers in order to save few millions of
dollars year.
If we want economy in naval programs; if we
want to force the rest of the naval powers to realize
the fatuousness and folly of carrying their huge arm
aments the way to do it is not to quit building Amer
ican batteships. 1t is exactly the opposite: to 60
straight to the head of the naval construction COM
petition, and let the world know that we who are
better able than any other power propose to let
lead us in this test of strength and staying quality.
How long would Britain and Germany continue
their present expansion programs if the United States
would adopt the advice of Commander Hobson and
authorize six battleships year for series Of years
No other naval power mas the wealth and re-
sources to stand real competition with in this
direction. Britain and Germany, already well-nigh
borne down by the weight of their naval burdens
would toss them over in utter desperation if the
United States should seriously enter the race with
them.
The navies of the world are economically use
less and worse of course There ought to be enough
naval strength to as international police
force in behalf of civilization; no more But that is
an ideal not to be realized 1t is farther away
than before, and it will recede yet farther
if the United States does not have the vigor and
purpose to step in and smother all competitors by
outbiddng them for leadership.
The truest economy, the surest way to end the
naval expansion race, would be to overstep every
other nations naval program, and to maintain the
primacy at whatever cost We can do it; none other
can match in that game.
The naval waste would end right suddenly if
this Government would authorize ten battles1ips a
year for five years. They would never need to be
built. The other naval powers would be at feet
before the first years group of kees we're laid The
second years installment would never need to be
laid. The whole program of naval magaomania
would collapse. That would be splendid service for
this country to perform for civilization. 1t is al
service that this country, and tnis alone, is able to
perform. 1t would be the true economy, the true
road to disarmament or limitation of armaments.