The New York herald., 1922-02-26
Michigan Mans Bill Means
False Economy, Declares
Schornstheimer.
IT'S DEFECTS EXHIBITED
Future Waste of About ST.
000,000,00O Would Result,
Says Naval Affairs Expert.
by eraser sCHoRNSTHEIMER
Special Dispatch to THE New YORK HERALD.
New York Herald Bureau.

! New York Herald Bureau,
Washington, ID. c., Feb. 20.
/ While every nation in the world agreed
at the Washington conference that n
navy equal to the strongest and 40 per
cent larger than its next nearest rival
! is absolutely necessary to our best in
terests, Representative Kelley of Mich
igan evidently believes that such a navy
is too large for the United States. He
proposes to reduce it to half It's present
strength, which is less than half the
strength allowed by the armament con-
| ference.
| An analysis OF the policies to be sup
ported, which were undoubtedly the con-
sideratlons by which the foreign nations
were forced to agree upon the large ratio
for the United States is necessary to
to show the fallacy of Kelley's work
These policies are not the work of q
single Administration of any particular
color. but policies which have formed
themselves out of our past history
They are: First, the Monroe Doctrine ;
second. maintenance of the open door in
China; third. the collection of foreign
debts; fourth. the protection of our
commercial interests throughout the
world: fifth. the protection of our mer-
chant marine interests throughout the
world, and. sixth. the defense of the
Philippines. This last polfey is even
more fnsistent than ever. since our dele
gates at the armament conference sac
ridced our right to defend our posses
sions with fortifications and land troops.
The ratio Is generally admitted to be
fair and adequate for the defense of
these policies, but not the existing force
which we are to have under the present
arrangement. However, If Congress is
not even to allow us the existing force
provided in the treaty, then why the
conference? America Is disarming by
example.
Provisions of Bill.
Kelley's impossible bill provides for
the maintenance Of half the capital ship
forces allowed us under the naval
treaty. If half the force Is to be main
tanned In a condition Of usefulness, then
even the great dreadnought battleships
of the New York type, only few years
ago the finest ships in the world. will
have to be placed on the inactive list.
We have several hundred millions Of
dollars in destroyers which under Kel-
ley's bill will pass into state Of decay
and of uselessness, necessitating COM
plete replacement.
While Kelley is arguing economy on
the floor OF the House he Is providing
for the expenditure Of hundreds of mil
lions in the near future. Under the
terms of the naval treaty we still re-
tain the right to defend our west coast
At present the basing facilities on the
Pacific are not sufficient to maintain
the ships which we retain. Secretary
Denby's bill provides for a very small
increase in these facilities--far from
enough, say our most eminent STRAIT
egists--but Kelley evidently does not
want us to have any. 1t would seem
that not only does he wish to do away
with our navy but he wishes to pre-
clude the possibility of our ever having
one.
Another example OF 'Kelley econ
omy'' is that the s210,0o0, 900 or $780,
100000 which Kelley proposes to give
the navy will not provide for even a
fair maintenance of the forces allowed
us under the naval treaty nor does 1t
provide the necessary money to scrap
the ships which we must scrap under
the treaty. 1t will cost about $780,
100000 to cancel the contracts for the
new ships on the stocks, let alone scrap
the older vessels.
His idea of Economy.
resentative wishes to save our money.
He evidently wishes us to scrap two
battle cruisers, on which we have spent
about S20,000,000 each. which could be
converted into aircraft carriers as pro-
vided in the naval treaty, in order to
save the money necessary to complete
them as such. New aircraft carriers
would cost about S30,00O.000 each. But
Kelley Is spending our money, and so
he can afford to throw away that which
is already spent II he likes. Possibly
a new war will turn up in O. few years,
and then Kelley can pose as hero in
not going to war, but by appropriating
huge sums to be gobbled up by the war
profiteer for ships which he, Kelley,
should have provided the money for
long ago.
Not only this, but the bill evidently
does not provide the money with which
to complete the ships provided under
the terms OF the treaty. When the
Japanese were allowed to retain the
Mutsu the nations agreed that America
should complete two ships of the West
Virginia class now on the stocks with
about S50,000,000 spent on them and that
England should build two entirely new
ships. The British have the money
ready for their Ships, but Kelley evi-
IDENTIFY does not agree that we should
complete our vessels. even though the
conference provided that we should.
This same condition exists in the case
| of our ten scout cruisers now on the
stocks. At present we have no ships
of this type, while the British have fifty
and the Japanese will shortly have
about two dozen. But Kelley. evidently,
can see no reason whyrwe should have
| any.
! Eject OF Measure.
! II the bill Of this Representative car
ries and money is not provided to can
Gel the contracts of the ships now or
the stocks then each ship will resolve
itself into separate damage suit against
the United States Government The suits
will be for more than the contracts or
the ships are worth when presented II
the Court of Claims-for is that not the
usual procedure? They viii be In court
for about five years and in the end the
Government will have TO pay n price
which is more than fair. for the Court
of Claims is known TO be very generous
with claims against the Government.
| Mus interest for five wears costs of the