We confess that whenever we have said a word in
criticism of the Admiralty or of naval policy we have instantly been given pause by finding ourselves unwittingly in association with critics whose language is both grossly unjust and abusive. A leading article in the Daily Mail of Wednesday which contained a most unfair and discreditable attack upon a distinguished official at the Admiralty who has devoted his whole life to the Naval Service was a case in point. It is pitiful that honest criticism should have to hesitate through fear of being coupled with journal- istic assault and battery. But we think that civilian critics have an important part to play, nevertheless, and should not be deterred. In point of naval strategy it is obvious why this is so. Mr. Churchill stood for a school of strategy which tried to water down the proud Nelsonian legend. He familiarized people with the idea of guarding rather than of attacking. Now it is clear that in taking the risks of attack—for there are of course risks, though no one is so silly as to want the Navy to pile up ships on German beaches—the officers of the Navy need all the moral support they can get from a strongly expressed popular belief in the sovereign merits of searching out the enemy and destroying him.
Previous page
