The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1921-02-24
What Shall Our Navy Be?

Is the dreadnought to remain the Can't
tai ship3 Or is greater reliance to be
placed on the submarine3 Or is the air.
plane to be the most important mechan-
ism in war? These questions must be
answered as soon as possible. lest mis-
takes should be made by the construc-
ton of weapons that would soon prove
inferior to their competitors The navy
general board has reported in favor of
proceeding with the battleship program
of 1916, in conformity with'"the guiding
policy that has shaped the boards con-
struction recommendations since 1908"
but the age of the policy does not recon-
mend it in the face of airplane and sub
marine developments that have taken
place in recent years. We can not be at
all sure that the board is right in saying
that 'in vention will provide means for
meeting the future development of these
weapons, and they, like their dangerous
predecessors, will continue to be only adj
juncts of the fleet
Theories do not satisfy. They must be
put to tn test. And the war and navy
departments are right in agreeing to test
the power of an airplane to destroy a
cdlClCohlp' 1HC SClLldH oSlIlSsldnO,
strong vessel of modern construction,
will do very we'll as target for airpane
fire. Should the test be indecisive, the
old Indiana, known thoroughly to our
builders, can then be used to close the
controversy. The country. must discover
if wisdom is with the battleship stand
patters of the navy general board, Ad-
mirals Badger and CoontZ, or with the
airplane enthusiasts, Admirals Sims and
FIske and Gen. Mitchell We have not
in America any such submarine enthusi-
aStS as the British admiral, Sir Percy
Scott, who tells his countrymen that if
the German submarines had been as
numerous at the beginning of the world
war as they were toward its end, the
head of the HobenZolerns would now be
living in Windsor Castle, and the English
would be speaking German. But the
question between dresdnoughts and air
planes is fairly up to US, calling for seri-
GUS and immediate attention.
While we speak of those who would
give first place to the airplane as enthu-
slasts, we must not forget that they are
men who did distinguished service in the
war and now base their opinions Oh ex-
perience. Admiral Fiske tells of the
achievements of bombing and torpedo
planes ID the war, and then deliberately
says that aviation is ahead of battle
SHIPS" and "the airplane carrier is su-
perior in all around fighting powers to
any battleship designed today" In a
battle between two dreadnoughts and one
large alrplane carrier full of planes he
would prefer to be on the carrier. Ad-
miral Sims says that 'should a battle
ship meet 35-knot airplane carrier at
sea only one result is possible: the carrier
would be able to stand off 100 miles and
send out airplanes to bomb and torpedo
the battleship and destroy her." The
British are ahead of US with swift air
plane carriers, each bearing from forty
to eighty planes, and when Admras
Coontz and Taylor Join Admirals Sims
and Fiske in asking Congress to author
ize the construction of two such carriers
there should be no hesitation to comply
with the request. We are not building
for war, we say, but for defence. Then
let US make sure of having navy that
will be able to defend, through having
its several arms proportioned and CO.
ordinated with the highest regard for
efficiency.