NAVAL SUPREMACY.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]
Sra,—Referring to Sir John Colomb's remarks on my lettet in the Spectator of July 2nd, I would observe that whereas during the past fifty years the French Navy was the only one that occupied our serious attention, other nations have of recent years so largely increased their fleets that the two- Power standard, which is the one, I understand, adopted by the nation, will no longer suffice to enable us to maintain "the same proportionate condition of naval supremacy that we have enjoyed in the past." With the Income-tax at la in the pound in peace-time, and bearing in mind the recent utter- ances of two ex-Chancellors of the Exchequer that we had nearly reached the limit of taxation, I fail to see how the standard is to be increased, for I fear any substantial con- tributions towards the expenses of the Navy from other parts of the Empire, as suggested by my gallant friend, will not be forthcoming. What is needed is some system of national service which will, in times of emergency, provide a suitable Reserve for the Navy as well as for the Army.
May I ask you kindly to correct an error in my previous letter? When I stated that the number of white foreigners employed in our mercantile marine was twenty-seven thousand I should have said thirty-seven thousand.—I am, Sir, &c.,
N. BOWDEN-SMITH.
[There is plenty of money to pay for an adequate Navy. If we were to make those to whom we grant monopoly rights in the sale of liquor pay at the rate at which they pay in the State of New York, we might add some 210.000,000 a year to the revenue without imposing any fresh burden on the taxpayer. That would enable us to keep both the Navy and the Army in full vigour.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
