New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-12-15
al Experts, Not Amateurs, Should
Shape Our Naval Policy.


sending to Congress the report Of the Cen
n Board Of the navy along with his own report
retarv Daniels invited the public TO compare
Judgment as TO the needs and deficiencies OF
navy with the boards judgment. Maybe he's
nv now that he invited the comparison YET IN
sw of the Presidents sneering question, VINO
hall tell us now what sort of navy to build?
he Secretary had TO produce some authority on
which to base his recommendation that Congress
should 90 on making appropriations for dread
thoughts So he cited the opinion OF the ooaro
land referred 10 its members as naval statesmen.
But If the General Board is the final authority
Nm this country on che vital question whether or
OF the dreadnought has ceased to be the back
pne Of modern navies, why should its opinions
h be preferred on all technical problems to the
;nions of q complete layman like Mr.. Daniels?
Nv the Secretary's infatuation with his own
3s and fancies in naval administraton-mere
issues so far as naval efficiency is concerned
an explain his faulty in praising the board
then Immediately cutting loose from 1t and
ng himself up quite the biggest naval
esman" in Washington. The public would be
simple to put its money on him in COM
lion with real experts who have spent their
in studying the problems of naval develop
he differences between Mr.. Danielss recon-
|dations and those of the General Board are
erfect justification for those who have been
Ting thoroughgoing investigation OF naval
Ithiencies. Mr. Daniels does not want to
knowledge that there are any shortcomings of
eouence But what the facts? The
setary asks for two new battleships this year.
General Board asks for four. Two battle
would be the normal increase, if the two-a-
building programme of 1903 had been car
ont. But only one battleship was author
in 1904, 1906, 1907, 1912 and 1918. The
ana, Oregon, Massachusetts, and Iowa have
become obsolete, and the Idaho and Mlssls-
were sold to Greece last summer and are
e replaced by one new dreadnought There
therefore, a deficiency of ten battleships, and
he strength Of the navy is to be properly
ntained four ought to be built instead of two
the next five years. The General Board is
ling TO the original two-ships-a-year pro-
rmme. Mr.. Daniels is pretending to do so, but
REALLY running away from it.
As TO destroyers the board asks for sixteen.
ar. Daniels asked for six last week, but yester
law he admitted to the House Naval Committee
THAT more than six" ought to be authorized.
The General Board recommended three new sea-
going and sixteen coast defence submarines. The
Secretary recommended one of the seagoing type
and seven for coast defence. The board wants
four scout cruisers, four gunboats two oil fuel
ships. one destroyer tender, one submarine ten
der. one transport, one hospital ship and one
supply ship The Secretary has reduced that list
TO one gunboat and one oil fuel ship. For air
craft in which our navy is far behind all other
FIRST class navies, the board asked for an appro-
priation of 100000. Though the Secretary
calls his building programme 'well balanced
one" he made no request for an aircraft APP
kpropriation.
AThe board gives substantial reasons for all
requests. Mr.. Daniels gives practically no
asons for his differences Of opinion with the
I'D. II is throughout case of the Man Who
rs against the Man Who Doesn't Know.
the Joke Of it is that the Secretary himself
shed 10 Congress the deadly parallel which
es his amateursh efforts to conceal the
comings of our scheme of naval defence.
the navy needs is a stirring up through
yressional investigation which will sidetrack
ielsism. with its fads and fancies, and put a
Iper premium on the judgments and policies
real naval experts.