New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-12-11

.
Mr. Roberts.
The Congress fixes the naval policy
of the United States" said Mr-Dsnlels.
ut had not heretofore been the policy
of the department TO make public the
recommendations Of the General Board,
but ] decided that the public was en-
titled 10 the views of its experts and
so adopted the system of Incorporating
those recommendation in the appendix
of my own report. | do not consider
the General Boards criticism of the
attitude and the action of Congress
was very wise. think the criticism
against Congress was too sweeping TO
be good policy"
But does the General Board not
criticise the Navy Department also,
said Mr.. Roberts.
3 The Secretary said he was not so
sure on this point.
isn't il fact, then" added Mr.
Roberts, that this failure adequately
TO follow the recommendation of the
I General Board has already placed US
in position of inferiorty in com
parison with the other naval powers
of the world which. as the General
Board says, may lead to war"
NO said Mr.. Daniels firmly. eve
are not inferior either in ships or in
men, nor in any other way. except, of
course in the matter Of numbers"
! National Council of Defence.
Representative Hobson. of Alabama,
drew Secretary Daniels into discus
sion Of the proposed plan for the cres-
ton of a national council Of defence.
The insistence of the Secretary that
/ the condition of the Treasury was the
matter Of first consideration when
/ problems OF naval enlargement and in
creased power were under discussion
provoked Mr.. Hobson to take up with
him the question Of policy. .
The Albanian wanted 70 know If the
Secretary did not feel that a co-ordina-
/ ton Of the entire estimating power in
council OF national defence, compris-
: ing diplomatists, legislators and men
familiar with the financial problems of
+ the country and with the necessities of
the navy and army. such as the experts
of the General Board of the navy and
the General staff of the army. could not
formulate a general plan. taking every
angle of the problem into consideration,
and bring about concord of effort
which, when II took the concrete form
of direct recommendations. would re-
ceive the respectful consideration of
thrusting politics and personal advan-
tage of the individual legislator out Of
the calculations of the future.
/ Secretary Daniels answered that he
opposed such a council as out of line
with the American policy of a divided
responsibility as among the three
branches of goveriment-eXecutiy
legislative and judicial. He thought it
would be destructive of the time hon
ored policy of government.
after recess the examination of Sec
rotary Daniels as to the general plan
of increase of the navy was reopencd
by Representative Roberts. Mr.. Dan
iels explained that the General Boards
original plan. as adopted more than a
decade ago, was for the creation of a
first line of defence. and called for the
building OF two battleships a year. and
on the basis Of the original draft OF
the = 4 the ultimate first line strength
of the navy-forty-eigh battleships-
would have been in commission by
1919. Congress had, however, seen fit
from time to time, notably in 1907 and
in 1912 and 1913, TO cut down the an
nual authorization TO single battle
snip. For this reason the plan had
been changed. and since 1908 the Cen
eral Board had ,een arguing the au-
thorization OF four battleships a year.
There followed an extensive discus
ion of the present and probable
strength Of the navy by 1919, the date
specified for the complet. Of the
General Board's plan.
The Secretary explained that the
General Board had always insisted
that its plan for development did not
consider eliminatons from the first
line because Of retirements of super
ANIMATED craft He insisted that such
eliminations did not take the battle
ships thus retired out of the navy al
together, but simply out Of the first
line.
Standing of the General Board.