New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-11-30
Changes at the British Admiralty

Changes at the British Admiralty
The sweeping changes in the British
Board of Admiralty and in the higher
of the Grand Fleet must be re-
garded as direct result of the criticisms
occasioned by the recent manifest success
of German submarine activity. Mr.. Bal
tours announcement that Sir John Jellicoe
has been returned to the Admiralty as
First Sea Lord in the room of Sir Henry
Jackson is not wholly a surprise, and 1t
follows, of course, that Sir David Beatty
succeeds him in supreme command IN the
North Sea.
It would be a mistake to interpret these
as a sign of dissatisfaction with
the commander in chief or, indeed, with
the navy. Some German critics will prob
ABLY endeavor to trace the shutting now IN
progress to the Battle of Jutland Bank,
but there is not the smallest reason to be-
lieve that the failure to achieve a second
on that occasion has anything
to do with il. The removal of Sir John
Jellicoe is designed to strengthen not the
Fleet but the direction of naval affairs
ashore.
The Board Of Admiralty and the For
eign Office have for some time been sub
iected to severe censure. From some quar-
ters criticism was directed mainly against
Mr.. Balfour, and few weeks ago there
was a loud, if limited, demand that he re-
sign forthwith. But many more thought
full critics were disinclined to lay all the
blame on his shoulders and felt that the
real weakness was in his naval advisers.
They felt that the chief need was gen.
eral strengthening of the board by men
fresh from the sea, men who had prac-
teal understanding Of naval war under
modern conditions.
1t is true that among these critics there
nothing less than a complete reconstitu-
ton of the whole naval administration.
They discovered in the present system at
the Admiralty a dangerous concentration
IF responsibility and were for curtailing
the authority of the civilian First Lord,
whose power of mischief had, they held,
been sufficiently demonstrated when Mr..
Churchill was in office. The reform they
demanded by which the naval lords would
gain a more commanding share in the de
iberations of the board has apparently
not been considered on this occasion, but
for the moment it is of little practical i'm
oortance, since there is no reason to sup
pose that Mr.. Bafour will abuse the power
ne has as First Lord.
The practical Importance of the changes
lies in the infusion of new
blood into the board. The complaint even
IF friendly observers has been that the
board was lacking in imagination and
initiative. When Mr.. Balfour and Sir
Henry Jackson came into power, nine
months after the war began, it is safe to
say that the change was welcomed by
great majority in the navy. But it has
been impossible to overlook the shortcom-
ings of the present administration, short
comings which enabled the supporters of
Lord Fisher to make some sort of case for
restoring him to office. The clamor raised
en- behalf of him was doubtless foolish and
but what appealed to the
public was that under him the first subma-
rine outbreak had apparently been sup
pressed, whereas of late the Germans have
been making marked progress
in their efforts to challenge Britain's SUI
premacy.
1t may be that this is in no sense the
fault of the board But what cannot be
denied is that, though Sir Henry Jackson
is unquestionably one of the most valuable
and distinguished officers of the navy, the
Board of Admiralty has been generally
lacking in men Of practical experience of
modern problems, and hence the coming of
so brilliant and so trusted an officer as Sir
John Jelicoe will doubtless be welcomed
on all hands with high hopes for new and
more effective methods of dealing with the
menace at sea.