Evening star., 1928-03-27
Credit for House Naval Vote
Is Claimed by Both Parties

Just what Interpretation Is to be
placed on the action of the House Of
Representatives in adopting reduced
building program for the Navy is a
matter on which there arc differ
ences Of opinion Some see victory for
the opponents OF competitive building
others think the larger Navy advocate
actually won, Notwithstanding their
failure 10 net all they sought
The meausre as passed by the
House" in the opinion OF the Charles
ton Daily Mail. is about as harmless
a naval construction program as yell
could be devised. Such cruisers as are
to be built will be Of The same tonnage
as fourteen new cruisers which Great
Britain Is building or has authorized"
The House program, as pointed out by
the Daily Mail, provides FOR S274000.-
900 for the construction OF Is new
i0.o00-ton cruisers and one aircraft
carrier of $4,000 tons II
docs not imply an orgy Of building Il
does not mean the creation OF great
competitive Navy"
If the bic navyitics who are given
so much less than they have been work.
ing for, are fearful over the state OF our
defenscs. there Is a remedy" declares
the Newark Evening News. Now that
they know how reluctant The Congress
is TO build a great feet, they may bend
their efforts toward getting real dis
armament results at n new naval con-
ference"
Both the big Navy advocates and the
advocates Of reduced naval building
states the Flint Daily Journal sec
victory IN the passage by the House 0t
a l5-cruiser bill The original request
Of the Navy Department was for IS
cruisers. 81 submarines, q destroyer
leaders and 5 aircraft carricrs--7l
ships In all. 10 cost $500 900 900
The big Navy men are satisfied. be-
cause they have not real ships instead
Of paper ones, and the small navy group
Is pleased with the reduction effected
1t does not represent a contraction"
the Richmond NcWs-Leader insists,
but a compression Of the big Navy
agitation. To call such a compression
victory for the forces Of peace Is
simply 10 fiatter the people who opposed
the measure"
d
The New Orleans Tribune contends
that passage of this bill does not bar
passage of another to provide for the
These Is cruisers and the additional
aircraft carrier" continues the Tri-
bune. win help TO modcrnize the Navy.
Should another naval construction bin
be passed. 1t viii probably provide for
more submarines For the admins
tration seems 70 have been won over 10
the policy of more cruisers submarines,
and aircraft with fewer dreadnaughla."
Observing that "the passage of the
bin Is looked upon as a victory FOR the
big Navy interests" the Detroit News
holds that 1T is rather victory for
the people of the United States, who
believe IN peace" and the News con-
cludea "For once the House needed the
voice al home and cut the bill 10 one
third of IT'S original cost"
That the vote might we'll have been
unanimous and that the Senate
ought to pass the bin With reasonable
dispatch" Is the conviction Of the
Chicago Daily News which explaln3
There is, of course no big Navy mem
ace IN this program, Neither Is there
any threat Of new armament race
The vessels are graveiy needed When
completed, they viii establish less than
parity with the British Navy as
IL nov exists The American Navy IL
suffering from n cruiser famine Con
sequenily il h not a properly effective
arm 0f national defense The san
Antonio Express also feels that "Come
pletion 0f the Is craft which the But
lef bin authorizes would leave The Navy
short, from IA professional viewpoint.
bat the House" that paper suggests,
has sought 10 avoid program
which might seem aggressive t0 other
lands The proposed expenditure Is
called by the Express thoroughly JUS
tined a. essential 20 The national de-
tense"
Referring to the Navy Leagues ef-
forts IN support of the larger program,
The Topeka Datly Capital says "Noth-
ina is more emoti0nsl Than the Navy
League type ~ propaganda designed 10