"Second to None"

The U. S. Navy admits, nay protests, that it is not the world's greatest. In point, that is, of size, though never of spirit. Last week, on the heels of President Coolidge's unminced reiteration of his country's intention to look out from now on for its own interests, naval and financial, the Navy Department proclaimed its intention: "To create, maintain and operate a navy second to none, and in conformity with the ratios established by the Washington conference.

"To make war efficiency the object of all training and to maintain that efficiency during the entire period of peace.

"To develop and organize the Navy for operations in any part of either ocean."

Superpatriotic parts of the U. S. press (Hearst, et al.) interpreted this announcement as a notable "reaction" to the President's speech. Nothing could have been further from the truth. Indeed, the Navy Department was at pains to explain that it was merely repeating what it had said since the international naval disarmament conference of 1922, to wit, that, within the agreed capital-ship limit, the U. S. Navy should be kept 100% efficient.

The Navy Department argument has been like that of a fire-chief who insists upon having for his men hose-nozzles and helmets no whit inferior to those considered necessary by the experienced chief of a neighboring town. Professional reputations are at stake as well as national safety. The Navy Department, and its "second to none" statement, were rather the agents than the reagents of the Coolidge speech. The common object was to put momentum behind the Department's cruiser-building bill (15 cruisers, 1 aircraft carrier) which got delayed in the last session of Congress and which, in the imminent session, appears impeded by the simultaneous emergence and solemn language of the latest and greatest treaty "to outlaw war as an instrument of national policy."