A. valuable contribution to the con-Wwoversy over the value of the acroplane against the battleship was made in the House of Commons, by Lord Stanley, when opening the debate on the Naval Estimates, He: assured hhis hearers that large scale experiments to ascertain damage by bombs above and below the waterline rad shown that this danger could be met by new construction and zoconstruction, while counter-attack by the ships' anti-aircraft batteries had developed out of all knowledge, It is more than likely that this statement will" be severely questioned by aviators who profess to seo In some of the experiments that have been carried out proof that the battleship completely at the merey of the ucroplane. Experiments which have been carried out against war vessels under wireless control have proved that it possible to hil the deck of the vessel with a bomb, or to drop the missile into the water near enough to the ship considerable damage. But these attempts have been made against vessels which were not protecting themselves except by controlled movement, and it is the opinion of the naval expert that, with the development of anti-aircraft artillery, and a greater effelency in ils use, It Ig possible to force attacking aero-lanes to keep at such a height above objectives as to make the chances of securing a hit extremely small, There will always exist this difference of opinion between the two ichovls of thought and it wil! not be solved until the two moans of offence and defence are tested under war conditions, Consequently in view of the world's desire for peace it Is to be devoutly hoped that the controversy will wage forcely for many 0 long. year to come.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.