THE AMERICAN NAVAL PROGRAMME.
[To THE Emma or THE " SPECTATOR."] Sim—In the Spectator for January 25th Mr. H. G. Daniels writes on behalf of the United States Government Committee on Public Information, 11 Ebury Street, London, to explain that the Naval Estimates of the United States are part of the "peace movement in America," of which we are told Mr. Josephus Daniels, the United States Secretary of the Navy, has always been one of the chief leaders. The motive thus assigned for what your correspondent calls "the enormous Naval Estimates of the United States" is not novel. Germany also, in proclaiming her ideals, built up her huge armaments, which challenged Britain's position on the sea, in the interest of peace, of civilisation, and of humanity.
In support of his contention and to show that Mr. Josephus Daniels's present Naval Programme is quite in keeping with Sits policy fOr the last six years, your correspondent quotes carious passages from, the Secretary's official statements from 1113 to 1918 inclusive. Whatever bearing them utterances may have on the attitude of the Secretary of the Navy towards peace, it will help to elucidate his position in American politics to call attention to two passages in his writings which are not quoted by your correspondent. The first of these passages necurs in the Report of the Secretary of the Navy for 1917 and is as folios-s:—
"The progress for naval expansion and new construction for the future, big enough to assnre America 'incomparably the strongest navy in the world,' will call for liberal appropria- tions by Congress."
It will be noticed that the United States Secretary of the Navy puts the characteristic phrase of this passage in quotation- marks to indicate that he is not the author of the expression or of the idea. This disclaimer is explained by the Secretary himself in a signed article published in the American Review of Reviews for April, 1918, in which he puts the responsibility on President Wilson. De writes as follows:—
"1 am keenly desirous to complete the three-year program It will be a big step towards incomparably the strongest navy in the world' whirl, is the goal established by the President." In his use of this iterated phrase, for which be definitely makes the President responsible, both in his official Report to Congress and in a popular magazine article, Mr. Josephus Daniels reveals the naval policy of the United States as dic- tated by Mr. Wilson and as vet forth in the Naval Estimates. These utterances leave no doubt that the present Administra- tion has embarked on a programme the avowed purpose of which is to make the United States the strongest naval Power, whether or not a League of Nations is to be evolved from the Peace Conference. The " international reduction of Naval Armaments" as understood by United States Government officials and their supporters, means a proposal whereby their own plans for the biggest Navy would be faeilitated by the removal of competition.
The Spectator, always a consistent advocate of harmony and co-operation between the English-speaking peoples, has in this instance sought to remove any feeling of apprehension that might be caused on either side of the Atlantic by American naval pretensions. Admirable as this attitude is, and much as we feel the desire for this assurance, it does not carry conviction to one who has lived in close contact with American Political and social life, and who has had adequate opportunity to measure the forces that determine the course of events in America. To one in this position the outlook at the present time is not reassuring. It is best for both peoples that the truth should be spoken plainly and without prejudice, no matter how unpleasant the facts that will have to be faced. There are some people both in the United Statea and in the
British Empire who remember that only a few years ago it was, said by many people in England that German naval ambitions, in league with German ideals, presented no menace to the peace of the world and implied no challenge to the British Empire. There are some true Americans who, for very good reasons, would deeply deplore another mistake of that
Previous page
