Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

30 articles on this Page

- TWO-POWER NAVY. .-

News
Cite
Share

TWO-POWER NAVY. Premier's Definition. In the House of Commons on Wednesday, Captain Craig (C.) caller) attention to the i r*JerKent and contradictory opinions-expressed by various members of his Majesty5s Govern- ment on the subject of naval defence, and moved— That this House would view with alarm any modification of the two-Uower standard &sdefined by the Prime 31inister on the 12th "nd 23rd November. 190S, viz., a prepon- derance of 10 per cent. over the combined strength in capital, ships of the two next Strongest Powers* whatever those Powers may be and wherever thev may be situated. Mr C. C. Craig (C.) seconded the motion. Nothing, he declared, would give the Oppo- sition and millions of people outside the House Sweater pleasure than to hear from the Prime Minister or sorpe responsible Minister that, the Government adhered to the Prmie Minister's definition. That definition was clear and latifiactory, but, a different complexion ap- peared to have been put upon the policy of the government by tjie statement of other Minis- ters that the Navy of the United St ates was not be taken into- consideration in framing the. Naval Estimates. The Government might just •swellleave France out of account" if the fact of °Ur present frieijdly relations with any Power Were a good reason for eliminating its Navy from consideration. Personally, he thought it ^as absurd to suppose that the Prime Minister intended to leave the United States out of ois calculation. Mr Asquith's Statement. Mr Asquith said he would like once more to ^ad the salient sentences of the two defini- tions on which the motion was based. The firsts had been contained in a speech that he made on a motion for the reduction of Ornaments on March 3rd in last year. He had tlten said :— The standard which is necessary for this country—you may express it by any formula you please, though I believe the two-Power standard to be a convenient and practical one—the standard which we have to main- tain, should give us compl-te and absolute command of the sea against any reasonably Possible combination of Powers. rhe other definition had been given a few ^*eks ago in the course of a debate on the ««vy Estimates, p.nd was as follows :— In dealing with the two-Power standard tnd the question whether or not we in this country have a naval force which is adequate to satisfy that requirement, you must, of course, not merely take into account the dumber of Dreadnoughts and Invincibles, but you must take our total effective strength [or defensive purposes as compared with the loniblned effective strength of any two other Powers for aggressive purposes. Be wished to say at once that as far as the Government were concerned they had made no departure or in any way changed the policy TOicU had been followed by their predecessors, whether Conservative or Liberal. Thev were proceeding strictly on the same lines. For the J^cfxcal purposes of the moment, however, question was an academic one, because •Oyonq • could see that whatever two Powers liked to take in any part of the world their Canbllled effective strength for aggressive pur- poses against this country was very far below defensive strength which we possessed. (Ministerial cheers.) He had no intention of disparaging the foi-mula of the two-Power Jwndard but a great deal of nonsense had been ••Iked about it.- (Hear, hear.) It was spoken sometimes as a sort of immutable truth, Gfctated to us by nature or providence which it *is absolutely profane to criticise, whereas it nothing more than a purely empirical 8*Heralisation, a convenient working rule of ™nnb applying to existing conditions. (Hear, These rules ought to be servants not (Ministerial cheers.) They were a to an end, and the end, in regard to Vhich there was no difference of opinion, was M ensure for this country under any conceiv- able conditions and against all possible hazards unassailable naval supremacy which would ltvo complete command of the sea and any attempt to interfere with part of the Empire or with our commerce an impossibility, "inisterial cheers.) It was the end which £ »st be kept in view, and the means "would to be adopted from time to time to shift- izq conditions. The right hon. gentleman quoted references to the two-Power standard rmmd by the late Lord Salisbury and Mr Balfour *t £ ch contained the phrase, The fleets of •ay two Powers which might be brought •gainst us," and said he meant the same thing *hen he said, We must take the total effec- strength of our Navy for defensive pur- as compared with the combined effective "length of any two other fleets for aggressive Purposes." In measuring the combined eftec- ,ve strength of two possibly .hostile fleets **gard must be had to the fact that two fleets Were not equally effective for aggressive pur- Poaes as one homogeneous fleet under the eopimwd. The rule also took account £ ships which could be used in line of .Tattle, and while we ought not to fjttlit1 vision to Europe we must Ctat*f"I"^arc' geographical, conflitia^s. on not be regarded as footing as Germany or France, ann therefore theGovernment held that under existing conditions the United States would r^t be regarded as one. of two Powers that we have to take into account. It was true in United States had it large Nary, but for effective aggresssive purposes against this ountry thev had not been treated as beiag in same category as Germany or France or -jjstria. This was not a new proposition. He Peeved the Admiralty had always acted upon j> and it seemed to be based on common sense, withdrew absolutely nothing of what he said. (Ministerial cheers.) He did hot diff Ve there was any serious or substantial "Terences of opinion, between parties on this and it would be a great satisfaction o the Government if this pari at any rate of *^e area of naval administration could be JJJ^ovejj froin the region of party controversy. "Ministerial cheers.). On a. division Captain Craig's motion was egativad by 27d votes to 114, and the House J~en voted on the expression of confidence f«oved by Sir Willi&m Collins with the follow- "*6 result":— Fur 272 Against 1OT f Government majority 166

SIRdOHN FISHER. ,--

TRADE BOARDS BILL.

FANCY v. SOLID COOKERY.

[No title]

GRAVE CHARGES .a

[No title]

NATIONAL EXECUTIV,E. ..

,EMPIRE DAY.

.THE "DUCHESS OF MILAN."

GEORGE MEREDITH.

LONG NAP Iti CHURCH.

IBath and West

CARDIFF CORPUSTHRISTI PARADE.

!"''PROTEST M £ ETIM6.'

NATIONAL EISTEDDFOD. .

ALLEGED CARDIFF FRAUD.

BOYS' SUNDAY " PASTIME."

DEATH OF RICH LONDONER.

CLERK'S £1,000 A YEAR RISE.

[No title]

SENSATIONAL OUTBURST.

"THOSE HORRIBLE EYES."

Levy for M.P.s. a.i<

BURGLAR REBUKES COUNSEL

[No title]

Round the Year. .

A WIFE'S POSTCARDS.

GLAMORGAN WATER BOARD.

NEWPORT RIGHT OF WAY.X