The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1914-12-12

,ssuus ,officialS from their belief that ] alI-bie-gun battleships the sread- naught type form the main dependence of any sea power. The eonstructlon ol two such ships next year was recon 1nended by Secretary Daniels In z ms annual report submitted today to Pres ihent wilson The Navy General Board urged the building of four The complete building program TOT the coming year recommended by SeeS retary Daniels comprises;
 z Two sdreadnaughts, six destroyers. eight or more submarines, one to pe a large, sea-going craft and the oth-. oth- CTS of smaller size for coast deIenss operations; one gunboat and one fuel oil ship.
 If this program is followed out, MT Daniels says, .-the Increase will be noteworthy and will give us a well rounded. navy equal. if not superior, or ;, to that of any navy in the world, snip for ship, man for man
 Secretary Daniels program, he. states follows the policy of the Gen ern1 Board Recommendations but re- ds1ees the number of ships of eacn rnends the construction of the follow ing as the 1915 program:
 Fs5ur dreadnoughts, sixteen destroy erss fhree sea-going submarines SIX ,heen coast defense subrn arlnes, TOUT scout cruisers, four gum boats, two fueI fa1 ssktps one destroyer tender, one snbmarine tender, one navy transport, one hospital ship, one supply ship ana a 5000 GOO appropriationsfor navy ar ar scrsft The Board was acting on It's policy looking to the completion in dsa9 of a fleet, the main line of which womb be 4s battleships. In it's re-s port transmitted by the Secretary, 1t 1s stated that the present situation or the batxIeship fleet is ten ships behind { that program, the total of those in icornnlissfon under construction and authorized for completion in 1919 be- ing thirty-seyen.
 Submarines come in for extended discussion by the Secretary and the In naval warfare Mir, Daniels says have strengthened faith in the eff cacy of the submarine. The depart. a1nent urges; therefore, the construc- ton of an increased number of sub marines and the larger utilization Of monsErated its enectiveness. There are many (very many more than a few weeks ago) who believe the time has come when the advice of Sir Per cy Scott should be taken Months ago that able English of1cer declared that the submarine was the most eff fectfve ship of the navy of the future and advised cessation in the rapid construction of dreadnoughts and the utffization of the, money thus spent
 
 ines The lay mind has accepted this view of the policy but the trained naval ocers making up the General Board are convinced that, while the submarines have a large part to play in naval warfare, they do not replace the larger craft. These naval states men hold to the opinion that the dreadnought remains the central and chief fighting force of a well-propor-
 ss,T45, s fs r,r,s,,-5 t1e opinion 1t has always heId that <corn- mand Of the sea can only be gained and held by vessels that can take and keep the sea in all times and in all Neathers and overcome the strongeat enemies that can be brought against ta3eIn-s It declares other types are va1uab1e and have their particular usea but the backbone of any navy that can command the sea consists Ezf the strongest seagoing, sea-keeping ships Of it's day, or. of it's battle ships
 Tine department feels that 1t is up- on safe ground h locking to the Board to prescribe tho character Of the ships sto be constructed. The large increase in submarines is most dearabIe, but nothing in the present war has dis proved their faith in tho modern dreadnought. The fact that there has been no enc0unter between these powerful ships does not justify the
 
 ton should be discarded in favor of the smaller craft vhichs has astoni sh- ed the world by its ability to sink cruisers and other craft giving it's severest and most fatal blows before its presence is discovered. It may be that naval engagements later on will teach lessons that will change expert opinion, but as long as the bulk of the abIest naval officers believe the increase of the navy should embrace, IQ..& &3<<-- sT. the destroyer and the submarine, the Secretary would not feel warranted in recommending widely different pro- < gram of construction
 However, in view of the demon strated power of the submarine I would impress upon Congress the i'm portance of making a larger inerease in the submarine craft, appropFiati ting generously therefor without reducing the appropriations for other craft. to the minimum
 That our navy has not neglected fhe construction of submarines will be seen by comparison of our strength in this craft with that of for efgn nav1es. It is roughly estimate ed that there are built or building for 2 ff1e various navies the following num- beF of submarines: England 84 France. 76; United States, 5l Ger many, S1; Japan IT. This estimate was made in July of this year
 When the. relative sizes of the fleets of the great nations enumerated above are consi dered, it will be seen that the United States has submarine GotiI- Ia relatively and actually very power # fu1. England fleet is more than twice as great as. ours, yet she has but lit tie more half as many more snbnar- ines. France has a considerably larger submarine xneet than ours, with a smaller navy, but she has in the past taken the lead in submarine building Some years ago she abolished the dreadnought policy to acquire large numbers of submarines, but ins the last two or three years has made unusual exerations to repair her deflcfensy in