45th July. Wuen the British Public grasps the fact that it is possible for a single strike to disarrange one department of the Government works to the tune of £2,270,000, we are of opinion that it will begin to wish with somewhat more vigour for some means of compulsory prevention of these senseless conflicts between Labour and Capital. It is indeed, as the Naval Annual says, most.unfortunate" that at the present juncture, there should be.this delay in carrying out our building programme. For as other nations increase their naval strength our predominance becomes less pronounced. Ihe Naval Annual thinks our system of manning wasteful. It shows how in ten years we have added some 44,000 men—the exact figures are 1888-9 62,400 men; 1898-9 106,390 men. But it argues that we are alarmingly weak in reserves. We shall have during the present year 27,000 men, As Lord Charles Beresford says we need at least 70,000 men. It is very satisfactory to find that this question is being taken ap in practical fashion, not.only at home but in the Colonies. The "Brisbane Courier writes: "It is time that Australians should face the question of ment. making & contribution to their own! £800,000 in work of this sort, and og defence {worthier of their growth and their undoubted future.... "Let the Imperial -governmenit find the ships and the principal officers and let: the colonies find the men and the money." The Adelaide Register' supports the view—" payment in' man-power instead of in specie," adding: "Of course, we owe our peaceful possession of this land to the grand'Naval Power of the motherland, and this obligation must continue for many years; but we should keep before us the double objective of helping to man our own Navy, and eventually assisting in the maintenance of Britain's supremacy over the sea," In Canada also the matter has been taken up with vigour, and we gather incidentally that there are no less'than 125,000 born sailors along the Canadian and Newfoundland coasts.
Mr. Brassey is more than doubtful of the value of the Powerful and: Terrible. "Ttis with sincere regret that we say they will probably prove the Shak and Inconstant of their "day." As: they were built expressly as replies to the Rossia and Rurik, it is satis have a Russian officer's opi ly effect. th:
the Russian ornisers must win their battles in the first fow minutes or be hopelessly knocked to' bits. At present we have no more sister ships of the Terrible class, but Diadems and improved Diadems are the order of the day in this particular: style. As regards other cruisers Mr. Brassey notes the excellent performances of the Elswick cruisers built for other nations. They "are from "900 to 1,500 tons smaller than the British ships, have as good deck protection, and as good coal-carrying capacity. In speed, which is the principal requisite for a cruiser, they possess a superiority of from 3 to 4 knots, and in armament they are in no case inferior, and in most cases greatly superior, to the Eclipse and' Arrogant." Why this: should be so, no one but an expert could say, but we have seen a quite satisfactory explanation of the reasons by Sir William White in another place. It is satisfactory to find that 25 of the 30-knot destroyers have passed through their trials. -'The Spaniards do not seem to have done anything with theirs, but under easily imagined circumstances we can well believe that a handful of these sea-wasps might decide the issue of a great battle.
There is a strongly expressed opinion that we are building too few ships of moderate size. "'I'he teaching of history is beyond question that. numbers have greater effect than individual size and power in an action, and are absolutely vital to the result ofa Naval war." Ships for shallow waters will soon: be found a necessity in our Navy, ships yet capable of lying in line against the battleships of other navies, "We spend too little money in refitting our old ships—magniticent hulls needing only modern boilers, engines, and arma France is spending about
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.