66

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND said he was firing at the hon. Gentleman; and he did not know whether that was firing at nothing at all.

He would take this opportunity of asking to impress on the Committee that the the Civil Lord for information on some of present provision of naval force far the figures in the Estimates. He looked exceeded the two-Power standard. That with regret on the fact that we had not contention had been supported by hon. provided for an equal number of boys and right hon. Gentlemen on both sides under training who were eventually to of House and emphasised by the become our seamen, as was the case last right hon. Member for West Bristol. year. The number had been decreased There was no doubt that the general from 6,200 to 5,000, though there was a result of the discussion was that the provision for 360 boys under training of Committee was impressed with the view the artificer class which did not appear that at the present moment we had a last year. There was an increase in the more than sufficient naval force for any amount of prizes given for shooting, which probable eventuality in any naval war in was a step in the right direction. Our which we might be engaged. He had seamen gunners ought to be encouraged endeavoured to bring that to the test of more than in the past to acquire the art any reasonable interpretation of the of good shooting; and money prizes two-Power standard, and he believed he acted as a great incentive to this as well had shown that we were able to meet as mere kudos winning. The hon. Mem- any such contingency in any part of the ber for Clare spoke of the Coastguard world. While there was in many quarters gunnery practice as firing at nothing at of the House a disinclination to propose all," but was the hon. Member himself specific decreases either of expenditure, not really firing at "nothing at all" in shipbuilding, or men, there was a widethe speech he had just made? spread desire, which came out very clearly in the course of the debate, that a stop should be put to the increases that were now going on, more particularly when hon. Members became aware of the fact that within the four corners of the Estimates there was involved not merely the voting of the specific sums included in the Estimates as initial expenditure, but large increases in future years. He thought the Committee should get some assurance from the Government on this point. We were constantly getting committed to small sums of initial expenditure, like £5,000, £10,000, or £20,000, which might result in an additional expenditure of millions. There was the case of the two dockyards, which would involve, when they were completed, an annual charge of hundreds of thousands of pounds being placed on the Estimates. We could not but fail to recognise that the present times were not only critical but transitional. Critical because of the naval war in the Far East; but surely we might draw the conclusion that being in a position of great naval superiority and acknowledged to be sowe could fairly offer to hold our hand and rest in peace. Still more was that argument good if we looked at these as transitional times in regard to naval warfare and naval defence. disputable points in regard to naval warfare were being put to the test and it

*MR. GROVES said the hon. Member for Clare might have been firing at the Civil Lord of the Admiralty, but at any rate he could not believe that the hon. Gentleman was firing at him. If so he paid him a very great compliment. The hon. Member had complained that during the autumn manoeuvres the Fleet had not made its base in different parts of Ireland, but one portion of the torpedo destroyer fleet had its base at Kingstown and in Dublin harbour; and another portion of the Home Fleet had its base at Bantry Bay, so that the hon. Member would see that Ireland was not altogether neglected. He was quite sure that if the hon. Member would continue to press the matter upon the Civil Lord, it might be arranged that all future naval engage ments should take place round the coast

of Ireland.

MR. BUCHANAN said that the discussion of the past two days had amply justified the few observations he had made on the subject of finance when he seconded the Resolution then before the House, and endeavoured

Many

would be only prudent to hold our hands, if possible, with a view to profit by the experience and lessons to be drawn from the war in the Far East. There had been no answer to the contention of the hon. Member for Dewsbury and the right hon. Member for Forest of Dean in regard to the expenditure on battleships. The Admiralty were taking the initial steps which would involve an expenditure of £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 on a type of battleship which they themselves acknowledged was not the best available type.

THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN, Suffolk, Woodbridge) said that these ships had been laid down some six weeks ago, and it was not possible to alter them now.

That

had in that sea nearly double the number of vessels contained in the combined Channel and Cruiser Squadrons. distribution appeared to be somewhat strange, because the naval strength of the country ought to be retained principally in home waters. Then the South Atlantic Squadron, with alternate headquarters at Gibraltar andSierra Leone, had been constituted. No explanation of that had been given, although it was stated yesterday that that squadron was looked upon with a certain amount of doubt and wonder by many naval authorities. As regarded the East Indian and Pacific Squadrons, they were quite small, but he thought they could be reduced even below their present limits, as no other Power, with the exception of America, had ships in that part of the world. He thought some explanation should be given of the changes that had taken place.

MR. BUCHANAN said that the Admiralty might have begun to lay down these ships six weeks ago, but that only shifted the responsibility further back and did not affect his argument. . There was another point which he wished to put forcibly to the Admiralty which showed still more the unwisdom of the present expenditure of the Department; and that was, that in all probability the plans for the new and improved type of battleship would be ready in the autumn of this year. If the new type was more powerful than the present and was likely to be adopted not only by ourselves but by foreign Powers, it would have been wisdom, from a financial point of view, for the Admiralty to hold their hands so as to have these new vessels of the best possible improved type. Another point on which the Committee should have some information was the distribution of the Fleet at the present moment. It appeared to him somewhat strange that there should be the enormous naval force there wasin certain seas compared with that we held at home. There were squadrons in parts of the world where no other nation had any naval force whatever. Taking the numbers from the Navy List we had thirty-eight vessels on the China Station; in the Mediterranean we had no less than fifty-one vessels of all sorts and kinds. We had been increasing our naval forces in the Mediterranean out of all proportion to any increase going on in the French Navy, which was our most formidable rival in those waters. We the

*SIR JOHN COLOMB (Great Yarmouth) said that with reference to the distribution of the naval forces of the country, he thought the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had lost sight of the fact that they could not divide the sea. While he admitted the gravity of the naval expenditure, it appeared to him to be absolutely unavoidable. He agreed in going as far as was necessary and no further; but they would all admit that the naval expenditure had reached a point at which it became very serious. They had, however, to remember that the Empire was a sea Empire and that there was no comparison possible between it and any other Empire in the world. The national expenditure both in ships and in personnel would continue to increase whatever they did. His own view-and he held it more strongly the older he became-was that the Empire would have to wake up to its responsibilities and share this burden. In talking about naval expenditure they should not forget the broad fact that this was a sea Empire or nothing, and that if it was a sea Empire all parts should assist in preserving it. As an illustration of that argument, he saw on page 11 of the Estimates a charge for twenty-five Royal Navy Reserve Officers allotted to The Naval Reserves in Australasia. revenue of Australasia was greater than revenue of Japan, and they all

any more.

Why in peace remained in war; and it was, duties therefore, obvious that it was very much with easier to arrive at the standard of what

The con

knew what Japan was doing. should Australasia escape her and liabilities in connection the Navy? He admitted that naval the personnel of the Fleet should be than expenditure would continue to increase; in the case of the Army. He mentioned but he looked to a better co-operative that because he thought the general system between all parts of the Empire trend of policy was to exaggerate the to provide the necessary expenditure. proportions of a reserve personnel required. There were those who said that the naval They knew exactly the number of warforces of the country were now powerful ships fit for service and they knew enough, and that there was no need to do the number of men required to man He did not think that they them. There would be no wastage could stop. They could stop doing what through disease, but only the number was unnecessary; but they could not actually killed or wounded. stop doing what was necessary. Suppose ditions of modern warfare had greatly it was found that the number of British changed. In the old days a ship might ships exceeded the ships of a combination become a slaughter-house and still survive, of Powers by ten or twelve. Was this but that was not the case now. Did not the country going to stop and wait until the present war emphasise that very point? others came up to it? If it did, then The naval reserve was there, but the ships when the other countries reached equality were wanting. He would therefore ask they would have ships of a superior kind the Secretary to the Admiralty to to ours, which would be out of date, consider whether he was not going a little because every ship was an improvement too far as regarded personnel. He would on another ship. What was necessary conclude where he began. He thought was to take a reasonable view, to examine it was the true policy to speak out expenditure and see that nothing that plainly in regard to the duties and was not required was asked for. He did obligations of the outside Empire, in order not think there was anything to complain that all citizens of the Empire should agree of in the Estimates. During the last to share the burden of the Fleet, without fifteen or sixteen years the Admiralty which the Empire could not exist. The had been conducted in a businesslike present arrangement was not right and way; but the more criticism there was should not continue. The increasing in this House of a really reasonable char- expenditure might weigh down the acter the more the Admiralty would look popularity of the Navy, and then there into matters. would be a reaction which would drag down the Navy to a low standard, which would be as bad for the Colonies as for this country.

There was, he thought, one branch of expenditure which showed a tendency towards exaggeration. He thought there was danger in imagining that this Empire demanded a *MR. PRETYMAN said he thought it very great naval personnel, and he thought he saw a might be convenient if he now answered tendency on the part of the Admiralty the Questions which had been put, and in that direction. He protested against if necessary he would answer further that. The real truth was that the Navy Questions later. With reference to the was so entirely different from the Army point mentioned by his right hon. friend that no analogy as regarded personnel the Member for Cambridge Universitywho approached the subject with great knowledge, and whose remarks deserved to be received with great respect-with regard to the early age at which boys were admitted to the Navy, his right hon. friend said that the early age had been already tried and had been found wanting. That was certainly true, but he thought that the conditions under which it had been tried were sufficient to account for its failure. The present

could be drawn between them. In con-
templating a reserve for the Army it was
necessary to calculate on something that
could not be estimated. In a land war it
was not the enemy they had most to fear
but disease. Disease could not be helped,
but it might be mitigated. That was
not the case in the Navy. The sanitary
condition of the Fleet did not change when
it passed from a state of peace to a state
of war.
All the conditions that prevailed

the boys should all go

to one

school. The idea of having two schools was very attractive in many respects, but the Admiralty came to the conclusion that the principle of the unity of the Navy was of such importance that they could not afford to disregard it.

The hon. Member for Leith had

on

complained that the Committee did not get sufficient information certain points. The Admiralty were anxious to give all the information possible, but purely on financial grounds it was not always desirable to say too much, because there were such things as countries building and providing against one another, and if they said too much about what they were going to do and exactly how and why they were going to do it, it was not at all unlikely that other people would do the same thing and thus cause us further expenditure. With regard to Rosyth the Admiralty had given practically all the information in their possession. No great naval establishment could be designed or even considered until after the most careful examination of the site had been carried out and the Admiralty experts had made their report. The. Admiralty had not yet received the report; in fact, the detailed examination was still going on; when the examination had been completed, and the particulars were before the Admiralty, the Government proposals would be prepared and laid before Parliament with the least possible delay.

system had very few features in common and another at Dartmouth, or whether with the old system, under which boys were put on board ship under conditions not suitable to children of their tender age, and under conditions of education generally which applied to the Navy of that day, but which no longer applied. The conditions now ensured at Osborne were such that the boys would in every respect, both physical and educational, have at least as great advantages as in any private or public school in the country. As to the suggestion that the Admiralty ought to seek advice on educational matters, he would say that the first thing they did with regard both to Osborne and to the general scheme of naval education was to go to the University of Cambridge, which his right hon. friend represented, and to secure one of its most distinguished sons, Professor Ewing. Not only had they thus secured the highest and best advice on educational subjects, but through Professor Ewing they were kept in the closest personal touch with all the greatest educational authorities in the country. The suggestion that it would be an advantage if the inspection of Osborne was carried out under the auspices of the Board of Education was a new one to which he would not like to give a reply for, or against, off-hand, but he would undertake that it should receive the fullest consideration. With regard to the wastage, the Admiralty did not contemplate any appreciable wastage right up to, or nearly up to, the age of eighteen. They contemplated a considerable wastage up to the end of the first year at Osborne, by which time they expected to be able to eliminate nearly all who did not show sufficient qualifications to make them desirable naval officers. There was one very forcible consideration, not educational but naval, which weighed against any proposal to fill up from outside sources. The First Lord of the Admiralty had recently stated that the sea was one and the Navy was *MR. PRETYMAN said he did not for one, and that unity of the Empire was a a moment suggest that the Admiralty had most important feature which they could any right to act on the advice of their not afford in any way to injure. Unless experts without submitting their proposals it was absolutely necessary they should to the House, but simply that they could jealously guard against any action not submit their proposals until they had which would introduce division or section considered the result of their experts' into any class of the Navy. It was investigations. As to the suggested originally considered whether there should Estimates Committee, the Prime Minister be two rival schools, one at Osborne had really answered that point. The

MR. MUNRO FERGUSON said he mentioned Rosyth merely as an example. His point was that, much as the Committee would always value expert opinion, it could not wholly relinquish its responsibility with regard to public expenditure. In some respects he was afraid the Committee leaned too much on expert opinion and too little on its own judgment.