The Washington times., 1924-11-11

and did not sink the ship" And,
backing up the chief constructor,
the chief Of the bureau of ordinance
sagely declared that 1.-The effect
was local."
It is a fact that both these state
ments OF two naval experts who
with other officers at the Navy De.
/ partment backed the Secretary's
naval policy at that time were I'M
questionably true. The protection
deck was not penetrated. The In.
diana did not sink. The effect in
merely wrecked tine upper part of
the ship, that was all. She still
Goated.
But it is proper to observe that
when I'VE Shootsa man through the
head the effect is local. AS a
rule, however, in such a case it.
would not be necessary to bury him
to kill him. He would not be dan
gerous In war with the top Of his
head blown off. For similar rea.
sons a battleship or a cruiser with
It's upper works blown off would be
quite impotent in battle even if it
continued to float! It would be I'M
necessary to waste more ammuni-
ton in sinking it.
Held to Blame.
These observations as to con-
gervatism refer to the situation
three or four years ago. 1t is only
fair to keep this in mind. But the
naval policy shaped by the Navy
Department and the naval experts
Of that day is largely responsible
for the unfortunate condition OF
our fleet in 1924.
And we well know that conser-
vatism always dies hard. 1t fingers,
catching at straws to the last
breath.
But we must be fair. Conserva-
tism in the Navy has been grad
ually but surely giving way during
the past year or two. If we study
the building program which is at
present urged by the general board
We find that 1t places strong en-
phasis upon air forces and subma-
rinea. 1t stresses also our need OF
more men. And is it not clear that
ships without men are like so
many masses of steel, useless for
purposes of war and leading only
to false sense of national secur-
lty." And so let us hope that
taps" will soon be sounded over
the grave of naval conservatism
Pacifism seeks to completely kill
the Navy. 1t will not listen to rea-
son. 1t will not compromise. It
would deliberately place this coun-
try in perfectly defenceless con-
dition so that we would lose the
Do oil Scko vAf
sessions and would leave the home
coast at the mercy of foreign
air force with its bombs and poi
son gas. 1t 1t unbelievable that
Congress and the people will give
way to suicide.
- "Little-Navy.ism."
Little-navy-ism is scarcely less
dangerous than pacifism. In some
instances it is more to be feared,
because, under the friendly guise Of
advocating a reasonable navy it
fights every appropriation that is
proposed no matter how urgent.
Now that conservatism is surren-
dering, we should concentrate in
fighting the two insidious and ever
active undermining forces that
threaten all efforts to provide this
great country with the first line
Of national defense.
We should await with confidence
the report Of the board of inves-
tigation. There is every evidence
that the probe will be thorough.
Witnesses will be calded to testify
as to every phase of naval warfare.
And there should be no need OF
further probing, 1t should be quite
unnecessary for Congress to investi.
gate again. The testimony will be
laid before them. Naval officers
only are competent to intelligently
investigate the matter, and none
others can so well outline the yer.
dict that should control our naval
policy.
II they fail nobody else can sue.
coed. Laymen can only muddle the
waters and delay action. UNpn the |
shoulders Of the present board |
rests the full responsibility. They
must sift. the evidence and decide |
how best to provide this country |
with a navy that will be fully pre- |
pared for modern war. They must !
advise Congress how most wisely to |
distribute the available money |
among three cooperating forces
the surface fleet, the air fleet,
and the submarine fleet.