THE NAVAL OUTLOOK [To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—I
hope I shall not be thought the least bit bellicose (a sununer in Gallipoli in 1915 cured me of all that) if I venture to suggest that Earl Beatty had really got at " the root of the matter," when he spoke at Portsmouth at the opening of Navy Week.
-With all the best will in the world it is obvious that most of these Conferences have proved futile, the Disarmament Conference perhaps the most visionary, while, to say the least of it, the League of Nations is in a bad way. We are the only nation that has disarmed in reality, while the rest of the Powers look on and smile, without in any way following our excellent example. About four years ago, the Admiralty allowed themselves to be deprived of twenty necessary cruisers, to provide a well-meaning, but idyllic gesture.
For Heaven's sake let us get down to bed-rock and face facts. A strong British navy is not a disturber of the peace, but an absolute necessity to an island country, dependent almost entirely on sea-borne traffic for its very sustenance, and with more oversee trade and connexions than any other Power.
We are clearly entitled to a navy proportional to our needs, unfettered by ratios or restrictions, imposed on us by others, unless we are content to sink to the level of a second-rate Power.
Abolish battleships on economic grounds, limit the size of cruisers and guns, abolish submarines for humane reasons all these are practical and sensible suggestions, pointing towards the beautiful ideal of universal peace, but let us be assured that Great Britain retains the proper relative posi- tion, due to her, as the greatest maritime nation in the world.
Tower House, Southsea. Major, Royal Marines (retd.).
Previous page
