The Washington herald., 1915-09-12
KITCH|N TO BUCK
BIGNAVY POLICY
House Leader Plans Fight
Against More Dread
noughts.
PLEA FOR SUBMARINES
L. Co.
Germans Have Demonstrated Supe-
rior Fighting of Submersible.
Revolution of Ideas.
BY JOSEPH T.. AMIN.

t.SSlOGEI w llSON Is aSSuTcu III aU-
vance of the determined opposition Of
Representative Claude Kitchin. Demo-
cratic majority leader of the House,
to any legislative program involving
increases in appropria tionS for the
army and the navy.
Mr.. Kitchin says frankly he expects
TO be in the minority. and that any
program which the President demands
will be passed by Congress. This
statement places upon the President
full responsibility for any action or
inaction which may come about at
this session.
In response to request. Mr..
kitchin has written out mis- views for
The Washington Herald
Lessons from War.
Il am confident" he writes. that
the next Congress will vote for larger
appropriations and will not take the
position as to naval and military ap-
propriations which l will. ! will be
a minority on the question. / have
not said that the present European
war has demonstrated the uselessness
Of the battleship or dreadEaught. I
have said. and l repeat it now, that
the war has demonstrated beyond any
doubt that our navy is lacking in
submarines, destroyers scout ships
and Other auXiliaries, including air
craft, far more than in battleships,
or Dreadnaughts. d view which many
members of Congress. including my
self. held and expressed long before
the European war.
The lessons of the present war
furnish many good reasons for the
probability that the war will dem
onstrate that Dreadnoughts. nine of
which we have now under construc-
tion and authorized. costing over
Sl2O. 900. and which the navy pro-
pagandists insist that Congress should
largely increase, will not hereafter be
the prime weapon of oftense or oe-
fense in naval warfare. There is some
reason to believe that they will be-
come obsolete after the determination
of the present war, if not before.
so far. this war has proved that
the most dangerous naval weapon of
offense. and certainly the surest and
most efficacious weapon of defense.
is the submarine.
VIII Knock Out ,BattIeships.
When the real. sea-going subma-
rine. one that can go and attack an
enemy's fleet thousands of miles from
base, many of which are now being
built by Germany according to re-
ports, is put into service in the Eu-
ropean war, it may. and probably will
revolutionize the warship construc-
tion policy of the world. The last
Congress authorized three of these for
our navy.
The Dreadnaught advocates in our
country repeatedly assert that the
present war has demonstrated the alb
solute usefulness and necessity of the
big Dreadnaught or battleship; that
the superior battleship fleet of Great
man commerce from the seas. If
Great Britain and her allies had not
had battleship the German fleet
would have been driven from the seas
and her commerce stopped as they
were. Great Britain and her allies
had enough torpedo boats and de-
stroyers and enough submarines to
have sent after each battleShip. bat
tir cruiser. and armored cruiser of
the entire German navy ten torpedo
boats and destroyers and three sub
marines; enough to have destroyed,
or driven to harbOr. under protection
of Submari and mines. the Ger
0an fleet was, the combined battle
ship fleets of the world. if located
where the German fleet then was.
Great Britain alone had four destroy
ers and two submarines for each of
the big warships of the German navy.
Would Buy Submarines.
Il am opposed to the big navy and
army program now being agitated
with so much energy throughout the
country. especially by the jingoes and
manufa Cturers of war equipment and
their subtle. ramified. organized and
powerful influences. l shall not sup
port in this Congress the eight, six, |
or four battleship or Dreadnaught
proposition nor the plan for reg
ular army of @5O.OO0. nor the plan to
provide $500. 600. 600. more than double |
The present annual sum. for the army !
and navy Whether Congress will /,
vote for such an immensely increased |
appropriation depends the Presi- /
dents attitude. If he should insist on |
that sort of an appropriation Congress |
would vote for il.
II shall not vote for any increase |
in the naval appropriation bill for an
extra battleship program. If the gov |
ernment has any extra money to |
spend. and must spend it on an extra .
increase of naval construction, then. !
in my Judgment. il should be spent |
on the increased construction of sub
marines. torpedo destroyers. scout !
ships and other auxiliaries, including |
aircraft and charging our capacity to !
manufacture and lay mines-mainly |
on subma rines and mines. and not on /
additional DreadnauGhts or battle
ships.
If no increase in the naval ap-
preparation hill over the last one he |
made. | think il wiser that every dol |
lar authorized and appropriated for
new construction should be for sub
marines and other small craft. For |
she cost of one or two Dreadnaughts |
put into such crAft we would have a |
better proportioned and more efficient !
navy than if put into Dreadnaughts, !
and most certainly more efficient for
defense. For the cost of one Dread
nauCht. with the submarines now
the combined batrleship feet of the
shores. We would have the largest
subma rine fleet in the world. larger
than those OF Great Britain and Ger
the war For the cost of a Dread !
nauGht we could build from twenty
five to thirty submarines.
Navy Better than Ever.
The Dreadnaught costs $4,000. 900
and upwards, requires 1000 men and |
officers to operate her. Sl.500,000 or
more for her annual upkeep while a
submarine costs from 100000 to $780,
ooC. requires about twenty-five men
and officers and very little for up
keep"
Mr.. Kitchin thinks that Germany
has demonstrated beyond doub: the
effectiveness of the submarine.
Why do not the allies go in and