The sun., 1916-10-08
What would happen fNew York we're bombardedby dreadnoughs provided with latest weapons
No Longer Could We Hope to Escape Destruction Should
Enemy Fleet Armed With Latest War Terror
Break Our First Line of Defence

naval manGuvres that have been held
within the past twelve months or so
have without exception brought To
light weaknesses In our seagoing de-
fences. Most of these arc the result Of
a lack OF material and an absence OF
certain types of vessels that the world
wal has shown to bc Of the utmost
tactical value.
Undoubtedly the rfavy would render
a gallant account OF itself in case OF
trouble. but an unbalanced feet can
mol reasonably be expected TO hold out
against a superior force. and %particu-
larry when opposed by men that have
been seasoned by battle and have prof
tied by the lessons OF actual conflict.
Therefore a European coalition against
us would certainly find us unprepared.
and the imaginary despatch with
which this article was begun might
easily become a fact.
What can we count upon here about
New York to hold an enemy at bay II
our squadrons were o~utclassed, badly
damaged and forced to seek shelter be-
hind the guns Of our coast defences?
Perhaps there should be no cause for
apprehension could one place unquali-
fled confidence in the opinions OF some
officials. Early in the present year
Brig. Gen. Erasmus NJ. Weaver, chief
Of. the Coast Artillery Division. APP
peared before the Committee on Mill
tary Affairs OF the House OF Represen-
tatives. During that hearing Gen.
Weaver said:
THE officers OF the Coast Artillery
I Cnrsna ara v,nf ,avti.,tsnriy uIurrn.J ~.
the ability Of naval guns to damage
coast Notifications at long range,
While there have been two schools
of opinion In that matter, l think that
recent occurrences. especially at the
Dardanelles. go to show that naval
fire against coast Notifications Is not
very effective"
This dictum inspired m Of the
members Of the committee to ask:
Nevertheless. 1t is the intention OF
the department to equip the forts at
New York with the larger guns?'
Gen. Weaver answered: Yes: not be-
cause we are afraid Of the fire OF the
enemy. but because we do not want to
allow them to take a position from
which they car do damage to property
back OF u.s."
Naturally, one does not have to be
a profound student OF military mat
ters to know that an energetic foe is
not going TO waste his ammunition
by firing on forts II he can lombard
the rich city which those defences
are designed to guard. II will be
noticed that ii Is the intention of the
military authorities to place larger
guns In the forts near New York. but
for the present We have nothing more
formidable to upon than army
IL inch rifles Of 40 calibrc. and most
Of the guns here are of 80 calibre, or
II calibres shorter than the prevail
ing ~ inch guns afoat, But in our
own naval service the 12 inch gun
has been superseded by the II inch
rife. Abroad the Is inch weapon has
shown what II can do in action, ant
because Of !ts performance the British
Admiralty in now bent upon getting a
new lead by the adoption OF the Is
inch rife.
At Sandy Hook the guns guarding
the entrance and a stretch OF the
Ambrose Channel are all Of The army
~ inch type. mounted upon disap.
pearing carriages. and the defences al
Forts Wadsworth and Hamilton, stand.
ing guard over the Narrows, are oil