Evening star., 1932-02-23


Star Staff Photo
timely disbursements, to prepare for
danger, frequently prevent much great
er disbursements to repel Il"
At this particular crisis In world at-
fairs, when civilization as We know it
ruin, we are not making the timely dis
bursementS which might well prevent
our being involved in that ruin should
ruin unfortunately come.
Our Navy, the natural and proven
bulwark of our country against outside
fncurSion, is being gradually weakened
by treaty limitations which we do not
build up to, and allowed to deterlorate
and decay through unwillingneSs on
our part to replace our ships when
those ships become obsolete.
The purpose of the two disarma-
ment treaties, the Washington and
London treaties, was not alone to re-
duce naval expenditures, but to make
war less probable between the nations
taking part. Certain ratios were es-
tablished between Great Britain, Japan
and the United States, which, If lived
up to, would make a war between any
two of the countries an uncertain and
lIdEdI uOuc pIlo Leu We IAAS
richest and most envied nation in the
world, have not kept up our Navy to
the strength allotted us, while the 9TH
ers to a very considerable extent have
done so.
Navy Declared Inadequate.
AS a result, we find ourselves with a
Navy at the present time more than
half of whose ships are obsolete. Our
Navy is not nearly the equal OF the
British Navy, and instead Of being kept
up to a ratio of to 314 with Japan,
as permitted by treaties, is, as far as
immediate availability of ships is con-
cerned, on a footing of practical equal
ity with that country. With Navy
merely equal to that of Japan we could
not meet Japan on anything approach
ing equal terms in eastern waters,
where, in case of war, the seat Of hos
tilities would undoubtedly be. So by
not taking advantage of our treaty al
lotments and by allowing our Navy TO
deteriorate we have lost the security
afforded us under the Washington and
London treaties and are the more likely
to become involved in difficulties with
the other powers.
It Is imperative that we win back
this security by building up to the ratio
strength permitted us by these treaties.
AS matters now stand the naval sit
uation is as follows: We have not been
for the last 10 years and are not now
proposing to appropriate a sufficient
amount of money per ysar to keep up,
through replacement Of obsolete ships,
even so incomplete Navy as we now
have, nor are we taking any new steps !
to build our Navy up to the strength |
allotted us under the Washington and |
London treaties
If no new ships are authorized and |
built before the expiration Of the Lon
don treaty. at the close of the year
1896, we shall at that time have but
68 modern ships in our Navy. Great
Britain. under existing programs al
ready appropriated for, will have 119
modern ships and Japan will have 156
modern ships.
We shall, in modern ships, be 1872
ships below our treaty allowance, Great
Britain 85 below her allowance and
Japan only z ships below her allow
ance-a very miserable showing ours
for the richest country in the world,
and especially deplorable when it is
considered that we are spending per
income, less than one-thtrd what Great
Britain, France and Italy are spending
on their navies and less than one-fifth
what Japan Is spending on her navy.
Large Property Value to Protect.
With a far greater property value to
protect than any of these countries, we
are begrudging to the Army and Navy
the support which will enable them in
case Of war to guarantee our security
and continued existence as a Nation.
Such was the natural hatred of war
engendered by the experience of the
world in the World War, with its evil
consequences, that an almost united
world has bent its efforts toward max
ing war impossible for the future.
Every decent man and woman would
like to see such a consummation
brought about, and to bring it about
peace treaties have been negotiated
and agreements have been entered into
limiting certain forms of armament.
The net result is that as far as writ
ten agreements are concerned the
world Is to a considerable extent guar
anteed against war, but as far as the
actual stopping of war is concerned,
we seem to be as far from our goal as
we were at the conclusion of the World
War.
The situation in the East, I think,
SO4ASIuoiNS4y SHOWS LIldC IldlSSed WOTlQ
opinion will not operate to maintain
world peace, and that no nation rely
ing upon treaties can safely afford to
neglect its national defense.
The whole paciflst argument for dis
armament depends upon the practical
and effective restraint imposed by
treaties. If treaties can no longer be
relied upon and if against world opin-
ion any one country can take such in
dependent action as 1t sees fit, there is
no longer any security in the written
word and anything but proportionate
disarmament, instead of becoming a
panacea for war, becomes an encourage
ment to war.
Pacifist Idea Declared Wrong.
The pacifist argument that If we do
not keep up our Navy other nations will
follow our example has been proven to
be without foundation by what has hap
pened in the world since the signing
of the Washington treaty. While we
have let our Navy run down, all of the
other naval powers, including France
~Nk