Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-02-07
LANDING OF ENEMY"
Sinking" OF VESSELS
START WAR" IN NAVY
Admiral Knight Asserts Fletch-
er Broke Strategy Rule in
the Atlantic Coast
Maneuvers
NOT so, SAYS THE CHIEF

WASHINGTON, Feb. "A controversy
| as acute as any that has arisen since
! the Spanish-American war has divided
strategists of the navy into two oppos-
! ing factions as result OF the recent
! fleet mancuvcrs off the Atlantic coast.
Admiral Frank F. Fletcher, comman-
/ der-in-chief of the fleet, has become the
| target for unsparing criticism on the part
Of Rear Admiral Austin S. Knight
president OF the Naval War College. In
official and technical terms, pointed
though polite. the latter has declared
that Admiral Fletcher, as commander OF
the Blue fleet, violated fundamental laws
OF naval strategy i'm disposins his forces
to head off n threatened landing on the
United States coast.
ADMIRAL Fletcher Just as positively
has declared that Rear Admiral knights
conception of what is and what Is not
one of the fundamentals of naval STRAIT
eEy Is erroneous. Whether the recent
maneuvers, therefore, proved or did not
prove that n hostile fleet can land a
formidable force in this country the or
dinary civilian must decide for himself.
ORDERED TO DEFEND COAST
The orders to Admiral Fletcher as com
mander-in-Chicf of the Blue fleet, were to
defend the United States from n superior
Red advance force, which was technically
conveying 100000 men across the Atlantic
with view to establishing a base on the
Atlantic coast between Monomy Point
and Chesapeake Bay.
The Blue fleet was defeated, according
to the umpircs decision in the strategic
battle, most of his ships were sunk and
the war game ended with the landing of |
the hostile army on the shores of the |
United States
When the smoke of the disastrous |
mimic naval battle cleared away Admiral !
Fletcher appeared before the Naval War |
College and there met with the criticism !
that he had violated one of the funda-
mentals of naval strategy by dividing in
stead of concentrating his force.
Admiral Fletcher contcnded that the |
material clements" of the situation were
such as to call for a division which, in the
could not be construed as
the rule of concentration Be-
tween the two, strategiCal concentration
and material elements, the controversy
seems to lie.
ADMIRAL FLETCHER'S VIEWS.
Admiral Fletcher before the War Col
ege explained that the purpose of the
naneuvcrs as set down by the Navy De-
lartment was to operate and exercise the
lcet, defended the course he had followed
)y saying that his plan may not appar
,ntly been in accordance with certain
general principles of concentration, but
We must remember that general princi-
1lcs are not at all times applicable to
very situation, and that forces may be
livtdcd and yet strategically con-
'entratcd."
Rear Admiral Knight, the umpire in
he war game, took the opposite view.
"The principle Of concentration" he
aid, was violated by the Blue force.
Admiral Fletcher gave his reasons for
his violation of a principle which he |
recognized as clearly as the
Var College recognizes it, and those rea-
ons to him and this rest of you may
eem very good. Perhaps 1t is natural
hat the War College should be inclined ! .
o place a little more emphasis upon
he matter of strategy than the COM
of the fleet places upon
t. IN other. words | think it was to be
expected that the War College would
ttach more Importance to the strategical
han to the material elements of the
ituatlon.
"'rhc first criticism which | make of
he Blue strategy is that it seems to me
D start from the promise that its task |
an impossible one. Now, apart from !
he inadvisability of ever taking just that |
lew, ] am far from believing that in this |
case the task of the Blue was
nything as like as difficult as seems to .
ave been considered. /
TT seems to me that battles have been .
ION against odds far greater than those /
'hich confronted the Blue commander 4
nd [ repeat that the War College does not |
onsider that the Blue task was anything \
$ difficult as the Blue commander APP u
arcntly assumed it to be- II
SPOILED HIS CHANCES. II
Whatever chances Of victory the Blue Il
may have had" Admiral Il