Evening star., 1945-10-15

Jdp UeIedI dS Reason
For Keeping Big Navy
Ry the Associatec Press.
The fall of Japan without land
invasion was cited yesterday by the
House Naval Affairs Committee as
major argument for retention of a
powerful feet.
What happened to Japan, the
committee said In report favoring
a postwar Navy of 1,082 fighting
ships, is most impressive proof of
the vulnerability of a nation that
does not control its surrounding
waters"
This was unprecedented in mar
tlal history and more than ever be-
fore proved the Importance of sea
power-a new type of sea power
that means control over the air
above the sea, as well as on and
under the sea-"
The United States, the commit
tee asserted, can be secure and can
discharge its international obliga-
tions only if 1t controls certain stra-
tegic ocean areas" and this control
is the mission of the Navy"
Ocean areas over which the COM
m1ttee said the United States must
retain and keep "undisputed con-
troll" are the western part of the
North and South Atlantic, and the
entire Pacific.
The estimated annual mainte-
nance and operation cost of $685.
100000 for the projected postwar
Navy lis very substantial" the COM
mittee commented, but when judged
in terms Of the price of victory
y" 1t is very cheap insurance of
national security. .
Peace Calls for Strength.
"The noble intentions of inter-
national charters and treaties must
be constantly vitalized by the real
istic maintenance of a Navy of suf-
flcient strength of materiel and per-
sonnel to keep inviolate the national
security" the report said. Peace
is not only matter of desire. 1t is
a challenging problem of enforce
ment."
The legislation on which the COM
mittee will ask the House to vote.
probably next week. calls for post
war feet of 1s battieships, large
cruisers, 81 heavy cruisers, 48 light
cruisers, 3 large aircraft carriers, "a
medium carriers, 10 light carriers,
79 escort carriers (baby f1at-tops)
367 destroyers, 300 destroyer escorts
and 1879 submarines. A large part of
that force would be in reserve.
Meanwhile, sentiment appeared
developing among Senators for early
merger of the Army and Navy into
a single defense force.
Legislators Express VIEWS.
The views of several influential
legislators, gathered in interviews,
seemed to add up this way:
/. Senators generally think the
atomic bomb is going to force a
fundamental revision in all military
tactics, and that the shift could be
handled best by a unified defense
system.
2. They want top efforts expended
on scientific research and expert
mentation. -.
3. They are afraid airpower will
not get the future emphasis it should
have under the present divided
services.
4. They see the necessity of CO.
ordinated air, land and sea action in
war and argue that a unified COM
mand ought to be maintained at
all times.
Hearings to Begin Wednesday.
The Senate Military Affairs Com
mittee takes up the question in
hearings beginning Wednesday. 1t
gave the Army-Navy merger pro-
posal, offered by Senator Hill, Dem
ocrat, of Alabama priority over
other legislation at a meeting last
week. :
Senator Hill said Secretary of
War Patterson. who favors the
merger, will be the first witness,
followed by Gen. George c. Mar
shall, chief Of staff. Secretary of the
Navy Forrestal and Navy officials,
most of whom are against the pro-
posal, will be heard later.
Senator Hill said, after a White
House call today, he was hopeful
President Truman will support his
bill.
Senator Hill said he asked the
President to send a message to
Congress urging legislation provid-
ing for the merger.
Acting Chairman johnson of the
Military Affairs Committee said he
is strong for the merger. The bill
would set up department Of armed
forces, with a civilian secretary and
undersecretaries for Army, Navy
and Air.
johnson Expands Program.
Senator johnson said he would
like to go step or two further,
He proposed a department of mill
tary security, with six equal
branches. A cabinet member would
be at the top, with assistant secre-
taries in charge of each branch.
He listed the proposed branches as
scientific research and development,
Air Forces, Army, Navy, procure
ment and military intelligence.
Senator Byrd, Democrat, of Vir-
ginia, who formerly opposed the
merger, said he is swinging to the
other side because he thinks that
the Air Forces should not be subor-
dinate to either the Army or Navy.
Senator Byrd said also that the
savings in military purchases would
be great under a unified setup.
Senator Austin, Republican, of
Vermont said he thinks it impossible
for Congress, the Army, the Navy or
anybody else to plan for future de-
fense until the question of merging
the services is settled.
Counallv Cha n~;,,r N6;rI