Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-12-09
SAYS BATTLESH|PS
CONTROL THE SEA
Admiral Fletcher Tells House
Naval Committee Subma-
rines Do Not.
PLUNGERS EFFECTIVE
FOR HARBOR DEFENSE
Also Bothersome to Big Fighters.
U. S. Navy Would Fight
Out in Open.

| The House naval committee today for
the first time in many years. conducted
in public its hearings on the naval ap-
preparation bill.
| Rear Admiral Fletcher. commander
of the Atlantic feet, in a general state
ment at the outset. defended the dread
naught as the greatest weapon of naval
| warfare.
THE European war has not demon
| strated.'' said Admiral Fletcher. that
! the battleship is any less valua BILE in
naval warfare than heretofore or that
| 1t is not still the main factor in final
| ly determining conflict.
The submarine undoubtedly is
very valuable adjunct to a navy. The
defense against the submarine has not
yet been finally developed. Eventual
| ly a defense against the submarine will
| be found. just as a defense was found
against the old-style spar-torpedo and
| the automobile torpedo. One defense
against the submarine already develop
| ing is the airship."
The admiral gave it as his opinion
| that great naval battles would con-
tinue to be decided, in the main, by
battleships.
Submarine Effectiveness.
Admiral Fletcher further told the COM
mittee, however, that if England chose
to war with the United States it would
be entirely practical to send sub
| marines across the ocean to dart into
an American harbor and assail the
American fleet. 1t was, of course a
supposititious case as to the practical
bility of such a move, and the ad-
| mira! frankly stated that England had
nice little supply station" to act as
a base OF operations 700 miles away
from New York harbor, the British
island of Bermuda.
The naval commander was bombarded
| with questions bearing upon the efficiency
| OF the American submarine fleet, the
erect OF the scouting work of airships
upon the value of submarine Operations
and host of other matters as to pre-
paredness and naval policy. He said
the fact that an airship could deter
mine the presence of a submarine slight
ly affected the value of the submarine.
The admiral asserted that he would
recommend as good policy the building
OF more submarines for coast and har-
Dor defense. He urged that an increase
of eight or ten submarines would be
sufficient. He would not recommend a
radical increase. he explained, because
there was very rapid progress and
evolution in their development. and
I'VE do not want to build too many un-
der those circumstances"
He emphatically asserted that the
real success of the navy must ulti-
the battleship fleets generally
Considering the location of this
country" asked Representative Bath
rick of Ohio, do you think that the
United States war policy. if there
navy operations largely on the de-
fensive?'
WELL replied Admiral Fletcher, Gin
that event it would leave the enemy
block on all your commerce"
Sea Control Not Affected.
Commander Fletcher also told the
committee that control of the seas was
not materially affected by the number
OF submarines operated by a belliger-
ent, and that while Germany might
gain some more advantage by larger
number of submarines to operate in the
North sea, the advantage would not be
proportionate to the amount of the in
crease in number.
Representative Roberts of Massa-
chusetts and others pressed Admiral
Fletcher as to the actual condition of
american submarines. He finally per-
mitted to go on record the statement
that there Was but one subma rine now
in actice frst-class commission Others
are being overnauled at the navy yards,
undergoing alterations by contractors
because of development of defects aft
er they had been put in commission or
for other reasons. not now really in
first class readiness. About twelve sub
marines, he said. were undergoing an
nual overhauling. All of the sub
marines. he added. should be in full
readiness and preparedness for first
class active service some time in Feb
ruary, and they will then be effective
weapons"
How far off shore could most mod
ern battleship lie and effectively shell
one of our cities?" asked Representa-
| tive Stephens of California.
of our coast" answered the ad-
| miral. the effort would be to obstruct
| our commerce. On the transatlantic
| trade routes they could lie 100 or 200
miles off our Shores"
Eyes. but l mean to lombard and
shell one of our cities" persisted Mr..
Stephens.
They could drop their shells at from
eight TO twelve miles distance"
would a modern battleship attack
and lombard city from that distance
4 If il knew there were some submarines
| there"
| No Gain by Bombardment.
| NO. nor would they ordinarily. even
/ if it were known there were no SUBJ
marines. There is nothing to be gained
by BON harding a city unless occa-
| stoned by the occupation of the city
by military forces and the presence of
forts. and in that case the forts should
defend the city itself without the
necessity of recourse to the use of
submarines"
| I'm case Of the United States be-
| coming engaged in war do you
think it should be the policy of our
feet to remain in harbor?" asked Rep
resentative Hobson of Alabama
| NO, 7 do not" answered the ad-
miral, emphatically.
| Discussing the question of policy of
the United States Navy in event of war,
Admiral Fletcher reiterated that the
American warships should not remain
in harbor.
The fleet" he suggested, could I'M
der this policy remain but in one place
If the fleet adopted a defensive policy
only and stayed in one port, the enemy
could strike our coast at any point, say
one 1000 miles away.
The feet should not be at any one
port, but should be out at sea and
should stay there. That policy would
prove the best defense for our coast"
do you think" asked Representa-
tive Hcbson. that the presence of
either a small or a large number of
submarines would have any material
effect on the control of the scar"
THE control of the sea would not be
materially affected replied the ad.
mirai