Transcriber’s Note: Italic text is enclosed in _underscores_.
[Illustration: (cover)]
MEMORIES
[Illustration:
[_Portrait by J. C. Beresford._
LORD FISHER, 1917.
Admiral of the Fleet.]
MEMORIES
BY
ADMIRAL OF THE FLEET
LORD FISHER
HODDER AND STOUGHTON
LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO
MCMXIX
_Readers of this book will quickly observe that Admiral of the Fleet
Lord Fisher has small faith in the printed word; and those who have
enjoyed the privilege of having “his fist shaken in their faces” will
readily admit that the printed word, though faithfully taken down from
his dictation, must lack a large measure of the power--the “aroma,” as
he calls it--which his personality lends to his spoken word._
_Had Lord Fisher been allowed his own way, there would have been no
Book. Not for the first time in his career, the need of serving his
country and his country’s Navy has over-ridden his personal feeling.
These “Memories,” therefore, must be regarded as a compromise (“the
beastliest word in the English language”--see “The Times” of September
9th, 1919) between the No-Book of Lord Fisher’s inclination and the
orderly, complete Autobiography which the public wishes to possess._
_The book consists in the main of the author’s_ ipsissima verba,
_dictated during the month of September, 1919. One or two chapters
have been put together from fugitive writings which Lord Fisher had
collected and printed (in noble and eloquently various type) as a gift
to his friends after his death. The discreeter passages of the letters
which he wrote to Lord Esher between 1903 and 1912 illustrate some
portions of the life’s work which--caring little for the past and much
for the future,[1] much for the idea and little for the fact--Lord
Fisher has successfully declined to describe in his own words._
_Preamble_
There is no plan nor sequence! Just as the thoughts have arisen so
have they been written or dictated! The spoken word has not been
amended--better the fragrance of the fresh picked flower than trying
to get more scent out of it by adding hot water afterwards! Also it is
more life-like to have the first impulse of the heart than vainly to
endeavour after studied phrases! Perhaps the only curiosity is that I
begin my life backwards and leave my birth and being weaned till the
end!
“_=The last shall be first=_” is good for Autobiography!
I think a text is a good thing! So I adopt the following (from R. L.
Stevenson) as being nice for the young ones to read what follows:--
To be honest, to be kind, to earn a little and to spend a little
less, to make upon the whole a family happier for his presence, to
renounce when that shall be necessary, and not be embittered, to
keep a few friends _but those without capitulation_, above all on
the same grim condition to keep friends with himself, here is a
task for all that a man has of fortitude and delicacy.
PREFACE
Not long ago a gentleman enclosed me the manuscript of his book, and
asked me for a preface. I had never heard of him. He reminded me of
Mark Twain in a similar case--the gentleman in a postscript asked Mr.
Twain if he found fish good for the brain; he had been recommended it,
he said. Twain replied, Yes! and he suggested his correspondent having
whales for breakfast!
One gentleman sent me a cheque for two thousand guineas, and asked
me to let him have a short article, on any subject. I returned the
cheque--I had never heard of him either. I have had some most generous
offers from publishers.
Sir George Reid said to me: “Never write an Autobiography. You only
know one view of yourself--others see you all round.” But I don’t see
any harm in such “Memories” as I now indite! In regard to Sir G. Reid’s
observation, there’s one side no one else can see, and that’s “_the
inside!_”
Nothing in this Volume in the least approaches the idea of a Biography.
Facts illumined by letters, and the life divided into sections, to be
filled in with the struggles of the ascent, seems the ideal sort of
representation of a man’s life. A friend once wrote me the requisites
of a biographer. Three qualifications were:
(_a_) Plenty of time for the job.
(_b_) A keen appreciation of the work done.
(_c_) A devotion to the Hero.
And, as if it didn’t so much matter, he added--the biographer should
possess a high standard of literary ability.
But yet I believe that the vindication of a man’s lifework is almost
an impossible task for even the most intimate of friends or the most
assiduous and talented of Biographers, simply because they cannot
possibly appreciate how great deeds have been belittled and ravaged by
small contemporary men. These yelping curs made the most noise, as the
empty barrels do! and it’s only long afterwards that the truth emerges
out of the mist of obloquy and becomes history.
Remember it’s only in this century that Nelson has come into his own.
FISHER.
* * * * *
“Sworn to no Party--Of no Sect am I!
I can’t be silent and I will not lie!”
* * * * *
“Time and the Ocean and some Guiding Star
In High Cabal have made us what we are!”
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
PAGE
KING EDWARD VII 1
CHAPTER II
“THE MOON SWAYS OCEANS AND PROVOKES THE HOUND” 22
CHAPTER III
ADMIRAL VON POHL AND ADMIRAL VON TIRPITZ 29
CHAPTER IV
ECONOMY IS VICTORY 41
CHAPTER V
THE DARDANELLES 49
CHAPTER VI
ABDUL HAMID AND THE POPE 91
CHAPTER VII
A JEU D’ESPRIT 98
CHAPTER VIII
NAVAL WAR STAFF AND ADMIRALTY CLERKS 102
CHAPTER IX
RECAPITULATION OF DEEDS AND IDEAS 113
CHAPTER X
APOLOGIA PRO VITA SUA 134
CHAPTER XI
NELSON 158
CHAPTER XII
LETTERS TO LORD ESHER 165
CHAPTER XIII
AMERICANS 221
CHAPTER XIV
SOME SPECIAL MISSIONS 229
CHAPTER XV
SOME PERSONALITIES 242
CHAPTER XVI
THINGS THAT PLEASE ME 272
EPILOGUE 281
INDEX 287
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
LORD FISHER, 1917--ADMIRAL OF THE FLEET _Frontispiece_
_Facing page_
KING EDWARD VII. AND LORD FISHER 16
SIR JOHN FISHER IN “RENOWN,” 1897 33
SIR JOHN FISHER AND LORD ROBERTS, 1906 48
THE KINGFISHER 65
THE FIRST SEA LORD. BY WILLIAM NICHOLSON 80
ADMIRAL OF THE FLEET LORD FISHER, G.C.B., O.M., etc. 1917 97
AGE 14.--MIDSHIPMAN 112
AGE 19.--LIEUTENANT 129
1885.--AGE 41.--POST-CAPTAIN 144
1904.--AGE 63.--ADMIRAL 161
THE FUNERAL OF KING EDWARD VII. 192
THE ANNIVERSARY OF TRAFALGAR 209
AMERICA AND THE BLOCKADE 224
SIR JOHN FISHER AT THE HAGUE PEACE CONFERENCE, MAY, 1899 256
COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE MEDITERRANEAN FLEET, 1899–1902 273
MEMORIES
CHAPTER I
KING EDWARD VII
King Edward had faith in me, and so supported me always that it is
only natural I should begin this book with the remarks about him which
I privately printed long since for use at my death; but events have
occurred to alter that decision and induce me to publish this book.
There are more intimate touches than those related here, which I
forbear to publish. There is a limit to those peculiar and pregnant
little exhibitions of a kind heart’s purpose being put in print. They
lose their aroma.
In the _Dictionary of National Biography_ there is a Marginal Heading
in the Life of King Edward as follows:
“_HIS FAITH IN LORD FISHER._”
It is the only personal marginal note! I now descant upon it, not to
be egotistical, but to exemplify one of the finest traits in King
Edward’s noble character--without doubt I personally could not be of
the very least service to him in any way, and yet in his belief of
my being right in the vast and drastic reforms in the Navy he gave
me his unfaltering support right through unswervingly, though every
sycophantic effort was exhausted in the endeavour to alienate him from
his support of me. He quite enjoyed the numberless communications he
got, and the more outrageous the calumnies the more he revelled in
my reputed wickedness! I can’t very well put some of them on paper,
but the Minotaur wasn’t in it with me! Also I was a Malay! I was the
son of a Cingalese Princess--hence my wicked cunning and duplicity!
I had formed a syndicate and bought all the land round Rosyth before
the Government fixed on it as a Naval Base--hence my wealth! How the
King enjoyed my showing him my private income as given to the Income
Tax Commissioners was £382 6s. 11d. after the legal charges for income
tax, annuities, etc., were subtracted from the total private income of
£750![2]
But King Edward’s abiding characteristic was his unfailing intuition
in doing the right thing and saying the right thing at the right time.
I once heard him on the spur of the moment make a quite impromptu and
totally unexpected speech to the notabilities of Malta which was simply
superb! Elsewhere I have related his visit to Russia when I accompanied
him. As Prince Orloff said to me, swept away by King Edward’s
eloquence, “_Your King has changed the atmosphere!_”
King Edward, besides his wonderful likeness to King Henry the Eighth,
had that great King’s remarkable attributes of combining autocracy
with almost a socialistic tie with the masses. I said to His Majesty
once: “Sir, that was a real low form of cunning on your Majesty’s part
sending to ask after Keir Hardie’s stomach-ache!” By Jove, he went for
me like a mad bull! and replied: “You don’t understand me! I am the
King of _ALL_ the People! No one has got me in their pockets, as some
of them think they have!” and he proceeded with names I can’t quote!
Acting on Sir Francis Knollys’s example and advice I burnt all his
letters to me, except one or two purely personal in their delightful
adherence to Right and Justice! but even these I won’t publish
ever--they were not meant to be seen by others. What anointed cads are
those who sell Nelson’s letters to Lady Hamilton! letters written out
of the abundance of his heart and the thankfulness of an emotional
nature full of heartfelt gratitude to the sympathising woman who
dressed his wounds, his torn-off scalp after the Nile, and his
never-ceasing calamity of what is now called neuritis, which was for
ever wasting his frail body with pain and anguish of spirit as it so
unfitted him for exertion.
Here is a letter to King Edward, dated March 14th, 1908:
“With Sir John Fisher’s humble duty to your Majesty and in
accordance with your Majesty’s orders, I saw Mr. Blank as to the
contents of the secret paper sent your Majesty, but I did not
disclose what makes it so valuable--that it came from a Minister
of Foreign Affairs, whose testimony is absolutely reliable.
“I told Mr. Blank and asked him to forgive my presumption in
saying it, that we were making a hideous mistake in our half
measures, which pleased no one and thus we perpetuate the fable of
‘Perfidious Albion,’ and that we ought to have thrown in our lot
with Russia and completely allowed her to fortify the Aland Islands
as against Sweden and Germany.
“For a Naval War against Germany we want Russia with us, and we
want the Aland Islands fortified.
“Germany has got Sweden in her pocket, and they will divide Denmark
between them in a War against Russia and England, and unless our
Offensive is quick and overwhelming Germany will close the Baltic
just as effectually as Turkey locks up the Black Sea with the
possession of the Dardanelles.
“_Russia and Turkey are the two Powers, and the only two Powers,
that matter to us as against Germany, and that we have eventually
to fight Germany is just as sure as anything can be, solely because
she can’t expand commercially without it._
“I humbly trust your Majesty will forgive my presumption in thus
talking Politics, but I know I am right, and I only look at it
because if we fight we want Russia and Turkey on our side against
Germany.
“With my grateful thanks for your Majesty’s letter,
“I am your Majesty’s humble servant,
“J. A. FISHER.”
* * * * *
_March 14th, 1908._
_Note._--This letter to King Edward followed on a previous long
secret conversation with his Majesty in which I urged that we
should “Copenhagen” the German Fleet at Kiel _à la_ Nelson, and I
lamented that we possessed neither a Pitt nor a Bismarck to give
the order. I have alluded to this matter in my account of Mr.
Beit’s interview with the German Emperor, and the German Emperor’s
indignation with Lord Esher as signified in the German Emperor’s
letter to Lord Tweedmouth that Sir John Fisher was the most dreaded
man in Germany from the Emperor downwards.
It must be emphasized that at this moment we had a mass of
effective Submarines and Germany only had three, and we had seven
Dreadnoughts fit to fight and Germany had none!
This proposal of mine having been discarded, all that then
remained for our inevitable war with Germany was to continue the
concentration of our whole Naval strength in the Decisive Theatre
of the War, in Northern Waters, which was so unostentatiously
carried out that it was only Admiral Mahan’s article in _The
Scientific American_ that drew attention to the fact, when he said
that 88 per cent. of England’s guns were pointed at Germany.
I mention another excellent illustration of King Edward’s fine and
magnanimous character though it’s to my own detriment. He used to say
to me often at Big Functions: “Have I missed out anyone, do you think?”
for he would go round in a most careful way to speak to all he should.
Just then a certain Admiral approached--perhaps the biggest ass I ever
met. The King shook hands with him and said something I thought quite
unnecessarily loving to him: when he had gone he turned on me like a
tiger and said: “You ought to be ashamed of yourself!” I humbly said,
“What for?” “Why!” he replied, “when that man came up to me your face
was perfectly demoniacal! Everyone saw it! and the poor fellow couldn’t
kick you back! You’re First Sea Lord and he’s a ruined man! You’ve no
business to show your hate!” and the lovely thing was that then a
man came up I knew the King did perfectly hate, and I’m blessed if he
didn’t smile on him and cuddle him as if he was his long-lost brother,
and then he turned to me afterwards and said with joyful revenge,
“_Well! did you see that?_” Isn’t that a Great Heart? and is it to be
wondered at that he was so Popular?
An Australian wrote a book of his first visit to England. He was
on a horse omnibus sitting alongside the ’Bus Driver--suddenly he
pulled up the horses with a jerk! The Australian said to him, “What’s
up?” The Driver said, “Don’t you see?” pointing to a single mounted
policeman riding in front of a one-horse brougham. The Australian said,
“What is it?” The ’Bus Driver said, “It’s the King!” The Australian
said, “Where’s the escort?” thinking of cavalry and outriders and
equerries that he had read of! The ’Bus Driver turned and looked on the
Australian with a contemptuous regard and said: “Hescourt? ’e wants no
Hescourt! Nobody will touch a ’air of ’is ’ead!” The Australian writes
that fixed him up as regards King Edward!
His astounding memory served King Edward beautifully. Once he beckoned
me up to him, having finished his tour round the room, to talk about
something and I said: “Sir, the new Japanese Ambassador is just behind
you and I don’t believe your Majesty has spoken to His Excellency.” The
King instantly turned round and said these very words straight off. I
remember them exactly; he took my breath away: “My dear Ambassador,
do let me shake you by the hand and congratulate you warmly on the
splendid achievement yesterday of your wonderful country in launching
a ‘Dreadnought’ so completely home-produced in every way, guns, armour
engines, and steel, etc. Kindly convey my admiration of this splendid
achievement!”
I remembered then that in the yesterday’s paper there had been an
account of the great rejoicings in Japan on the launch of this
“Dreadnought.” The sequel is good. The Japanese Ambassador sought
me later in the evening and said: “Sir John! it was kind of you to
remind the King about the ‘Dreadnought’ as it enables me to send a
much coveted recognition to Japan in the King’s words!” I said: “My
dear Ambassador, I never said a word to the King, and I am truly and
heartily ashamed that as First Sea Lord it never occurred to me to
congratulate you on what the King has truly designated as a splendid
feat!”
I expect the Ambassador spent a young fortune in sending out a telegram
to Japan, and do you wonder that King Edward was a Cosmopolitan Idol?
Another occasion to illustrate his saying out of his heart always the
right thing at the right time. I was journeying with His Majesty from
Biarritz to Toulon--I was alone with him in his railway carriage, there
was a railway time table before him. The train began unexpectedly to
slow down, and he said “Hulloa! why are we stopping?” I said, “Perhaps,
your Majesty, the engine wants a drink!” so we stopped at a big station
we were to have passed through--the masses of people shouted not “Vive
le Roi!” but “EDOUARD!” (As the Governor of the Bank of France said
to a friend of mine, “If he stays in France much longer we shall have
him as our King! When’s he going?”). Sir Stanley Clarke I saw get out
and fetch the Prefect and the General in Command to the King--the King
got out, said something sweet to the Prefect and then turned to the
General and said with quite unaffected delight, “Oh, Mon Général! How
delightful to meet you again! how glorious was that splendid regiment
of yours, the --th Regiment of Infantry, which I inspected 20 years
ago!” If I ever saw Heaven in a man’s face, that General had it! He was
certainly a most splendid looking man and not to be forgotten, but yet
it was striking the King coming out with his immediate remembrance of
him. Well! that incident you may be sure went through the French Army,
and being a conscript nation, it went into every village of France! Do
you wonder he was loved in France? And yet the King had the simplicity
and even the weaknesses of a child, and sometimes the petulance
thereof. He gave me a lovely box of all sizes of rosettes of the Legion
of Honour adapted to each kind of uniform coat, and he added, “Always
wear this in France--I find it aids me very much in getting about!” As
if he wasn’t as well known in all France as the Town Pump!
These are the sweet incidents that illustrate his nature!
He went to a lunch at Marienbad with some great swells who were there
who had invited His Majesty to meet a party of the King’s friends from
Carlsbad, where I was--I wasn’t asked--being an arranged snub! A
looker-on described the scene to me. The King came in and said “How
d’ye do” all round and then said to the Host, “Where’s the Admiral?”
My absence was apologised for--lunch was ready and announced. The King
said, “Excuse me a moment, I must write him a letter to say how sorry I
am at the oversight,” so he left them stewing in their own juice, and
His Majesty’s letter to me was lovely--I’ve kept that one. He began by
d----ing the pen and then the blotting paper!--there were big blots and
smudges! He came back and gave the letter to my friend and said, “See
he gets it directly you get back to Carlsbad to-night.”
Once at a very dull lunch party given in his honour I sat next King
Edward and said to His Majesty: “Pretty dull, Sir, this--hadn’t I
better give them a song?” He was delighted! (_he always did enjoy
everything!_) so I recited (but, of course, I can’t repeat the
delicious Cockney tune in writing, so it loses all its aroma!). Two
tramps had been camping out (as was their usual custom) in Trafalgar
Square. They appear on the stage leaning against each other for
support!--too much beer! They look upwards at Nelson on his monument,
and in an inimitable and “beery” voice they each sing:
“We live in Trafalgar Square, with four Lions to guard us,
Fountains and statues all over the place!
The ‘Metropole’ staring us right in the face!
We own it’s a trifle draughty--but we don’t want to make no fuss!
What’s _good e-nough_ for Nelson is good _e-nough_ for us!”
On another occasion I was driving with him alone, and utterly carried
away by my feelings, I suddenly stood up in the carriage and waved to
a very beautiful woman who I thought was in America! The King was
awfully angry, but I made it much worse by saying I had forgotten
all about him! But he added, “Well! find out where she lives and let
me know,” and he gave her little child a sovereign and asked her to
dinner, to my intense joy!
On a classic occasion at Balmoral, when staying with King Edward,
I unfolded a plan, much to his delight (now that masts and sails
are extinct), of fusing the Army into the Navy--an “Army and Navy
co-operative society.” And my favourite illustration has always been
the magnificent help of our splendid soldiers at the Battle of Cape
St. Vincent, where a Sergeant of the 69th Regiment was the first to
board the Spanish three-decker, “San Josef,” and he turned then round
to help Lord Nelson, who, with his one arm, found it difficult to get
through the stern port of the “San Josef” again. In Lord Howe’s victory
two Regiments participated--the Queen’s Royal West Surrey Regiment
(formerly the 2nd Foot) and the Worcestershire Regiment (formerly the
29th and 36th Regiment). Let us hope that the Future will bring us back
to that good old practice! This was the occasion when I was so carried
away by the subject that I found myself shaking my fist in the King’s
face!
Lord Denbigh, in a lecture he gave at the Royal Colonial Institute,
related an incident which he quite correctly stated had hitherto been
a piece of diplomatic secret history, and it is how I got the Grand
Cordon of the Legion of Honour, associated with a lovely episode with
King Edward of blessed memory.
In 1906, at Madeira, the Germans first took an hotel; then they wanted
a Convalescent Home; and finally put forth the desire to establish
certain vested interests. They imperiously demanded certain concessions
from Portugal. The most significant of these amounted to a coaling
station isolated and fortified. The German Ambassador at Lisbon called
on the Portuguese Prime Minister at 10 o’clock one Saturday night and
said that if he didn’t get his answer by 10 o’clock the next night he
should leave. The Portuguese sent us a telegram. That night we ordered
the British Fleet to move. The next morning the German Ambassador told
the Portuguese Prime Minister that he had made a mistake in the cipher,
and he was awfully sorry but he wasn’t going; it was all his fault, he
said, and he had been reprimanded by his Government. (As if any German
had ever yet made a mistake with a telegram!)
To resume about the Grand Cordon of the Legion of Honour. The French
Official statement when conveying to me the felicitations of the
President of the French Republic was that I had the distinction of
being at that time the only living Englishman who had received this
honour, but the disaster that had been averted by the timely action of
the British Fleet deserved it. So that evening, on meeting King Edward,
I told His Majesty of the quite unexpected honour that I had received,
and that I had been informed that I was the only Englishman that had
got it, on which the King said: “Excuse me I’ve got it!” Then, alas, I
made a _faux pas_ and said “Kings don’t count!” And no more do they!
He got it because certainly they all loved him in the first place, and
secondly, President Loubet couldn’t help it, while if it hadn’t been
for the British Fleet on this occasion the Germans would have been in
Paris in a week, and if the Germans had known as much as they do now
they would have been!
I don’t mean to urge that King Edward was in any way a clever man.
I’m not sure that he could do the rule of three, _but he had the
Heavenly gift of Proportion and Perspective!_ Brains never yet moved
the Masses--but Emotion and Earnestness will not only move the Masses,
but they will remove Mountains! As I told Queen Alexandra on seeing his
dear face (dead) for the last time, his epitaph is the great words of
Pascal in the “Pensées” (Chapter ix, 19):
“Le cœur a ses raisons
Que la raison ne connaît point.”
(“The heart has reasons that reason knows nothing about”!)
He was a noble man and every inch a King! God Bless Him! I don’t either
say he was a Saint! I know lots of cabbages that are saints!--they
couldn’t sin if they wanted to!
_Postscript._
It suddenly occurred to me to send these notes on King Edward to Lord
Esher as he had peculiar opportunities of realizing King Edward’s
special qualities as a King, and realized how much there was in him of
the Tudor gift of being an autocrat and yet being loved of the people!
_Lord Esher to Lord Fisher_
ROMAN CAMP,
CALLANDER, N.B.
_July 30, 1918._
MY DEAR ADMIRAL,
The pages are wonderful, because they are _you_.
Not a square inch of pose about them.
Tears! that was the result of reading what you have to say about
King Edward. But do you recollect our talk with him on board
the Royal Yacht about France and Germany? Surely that was worth
recording.
I have kept many of his letters. They show him to have been
one of the “cleverest” of men. He had never depended upon
book-learning--why should he?
He read, not books--but men and women--and jolly good reading too!
But he knew everything that it was requisite a King should
know--unless Learning prepares a man for action, it is not of much
value in this work-a-day world: and no Sovereign since the Tudors
was so brave and wise in action as this King!
Your anecdotes of him are splendid. Add to them all that you can
remember.
It was a pleasure to be scolded by the King for the sake of the
smile you subsequently got.
The most awful time I ever had with him was at Balmoral when I
refused to be Secretary of State for War. But I beat him on that,
thank God!
Ever yours,
My beloved Admiral,
ESHER.
_Letter from Lord Redesdale_
1 KENSINGTON COURT, W.
_May 24, 1915._
MY DEAR FISHER,
Do me the favour of accepting this little attempt to render justice
to the best friend you ever had. (King Edward the Seventh.)
You and he were worthy of one another. Your old and very
affectionate friend,
REDESDALE.
The following letter, written in 1907, would never
have been penned but for the kindly intimacy and
confidence placed and reposed in me by King Edward;
it therefore rightly comes in these remarks about him;
and so does the subsequent explanatory note on “Nelson
and Copenhagen.”
EXTRACT FROM A LETTER FROM SIR JOHN FISHER TO KING EDWARD
I have just received Reich’s book. It is one unmitigated mass of
misrepresentations.
In March this year, 1907, it is an absolute fact that Germany
had not laid down a single “Dreadnought,” nor had she commenced
building a single Battleship or Big Cruiser for eighteen months.
_Germany has been paralysed by the “Dreadnought.”_
The more the German Admiralty looked into her qualities the more
convinced they became that they must follow suit, and the more
convinced they were that the whole of their existing Battle Fleet
was utterly useless because utterly wanting in gun power! For
instance, half of the whole German Battle Fleet is only about equal
to the English Armoured Cruisers.
The German Admiralty wrestled with the “Dreadnought” problem for
eighteen months, and did nothing. Why? Because it meant their
spending twelve and a half million sterling on widening and
deepening the Kiel Canal, and in dredging all their harbours and
all the approaches to their harbours, because if they did not
do so it would be no use building German “Dreadnoughts” because
they could not float! But there was another reason never yet made
public. It is this: Our Battleships draw too much water to get
close into the German Coast and harbours (we have to build ours big
to go all over the world with great fuel endurance). But the German
Admiralty is going, is indeed obliged, to spend twelve and a half
million sterling in dredging so as to allow these existing ships
of ours to go and fight them in their own waters when before they
could not do so. It was, indeed, a Machiavellian interference of
Providence on our behalf that brought about the evolution of the
“Dreadnought.”
To return to Mr. Reich. He makes the flesh of the British public
creep at page 78 _et seq._, by saying what the Germans are going to
do. He does not say what they have done and what we have done.
Now this is the truth: England has seven “Dreadnoughts” and three
“Dreadnought” Battle Cruisers (which last three ships are, in my
opinion, far better than “Dreadnoughts”); total, ten “Dreadnoughts”
built and building, while Germany, in March last, had not begun
even one “Dreadnought.” It is doubtful if, even so late as May
last, a German “Dreadnought” had been commenced. It will therefore
be seen, from this one fact, what a liar Mr. Reich is.
Again, at page 86, he makes out the Germans are stronger than we
are in torpedo craft, and states that England has only 24 fully
commissioned Destroyers.
Again, what are the real facts? As stated in an Admiralty official
document, dated August 22nd, 1907: “We have 123 Destroyers and 40
Submarines. The Germans have 48 Destroyers and 1 Submarine.”
The whole of our Destroyers and Submarines are absolutely efficient
and ready for instant battle and are fully manned, except a portion
of the Destroyers, which have four-fifths of their crew on board.
Quite enough for instant service, and can be filled up under an
hour to full crew. And they are all of them constantly being
exercised.
There is one more piece of information I have to give: Admiral
Tirpitz, the German Minister of Marine, has just stated, in a
secret official document, that the English Navy is now four times
stronger than the German Navy. Yes, that is so, and we are going to
keep the British Navy at that strength, _vide_ ten “Dreadnoughts”
built and building, and not one German “Dreadnought” commenced last
May. But we don’t want to parade all this to the world at large.
Also we might have Parliamentary trouble. A hundred and fifty
members of the House of Commons have just prepared one of the best
papers I have ever read, shewing convincingly that we don’t want to
lay down any new ships at all because we are so strong. My answer
is: We can’t be too strong. Sir Charles Dilke, in the _United
Service Magazine_ for this month, says: “Sir George Clarke points
out that the Navy is now, in October, 1907, stronger than at any
previous time in all History,” and he adds that Sir George Clarke,
in making this printed statement, makes it with the full knowledge
of all the secrets of the Government, because, as Secretary of the
Committee of Imperial Defence, he, Sir George Clarke, has access
to every bit of information that exists in regard to our own and
foreign Naval strength.
[Illustration:
KING EDWARD VII. (WHO DIED MAY 6TH, 1910)
SAYING GOOD-BYE TO LORD FISHER, FIRST SEA
LORD, 1910.
(Lord Fisher 69, so also the King.)
N.B.--The King thought the 1841 vintage very
good. Certainly good men were born that year!]
In conclusion, a letter in _The Times_ of September 17th, 1907,
should be read. The writer of the letter understates the case, as
the British Home Fleet is twenty per cent. stronger than he puts it.
As regards Mr. Reich’s Naval statements, they are a _réchauffé_
of the mendacious drivel of a certain English newspaper. I got a
letter last night from a trustworthy person _à propos_ of these
virulent and persistent newspaper attacks as to the weakness of
the Navy, stating that the recent inspection of the Fleet by
Your Majesty has knocked the bottom out of the case against the
Admiralty.
I don’t mean to say that we are not now menaced by Germany. Her
diplomacy is, and always has been, and always will be, infinitely
superior to ours. Observe our treatment of the Sultan as compared
with Germany. The Sultan is the most important personage in the
whole world for England. He lifts his finger, and Egypt and India
are in a blaze of religious disaffection. That great American,
Mr. Choate, swore to me before going to the Hague Conference that
he would side with England over submarine mines and other Naval
matters, but Germany has diplomatically collared the United States
absolutely at The Hague.
_The only thing in the world that England has to fear is
Germany, and none else._
We have no idea, at the Foreign Office, of coping with the German
propaganda in America. Our Naval Attaché in the United States tells
me that the German Emperor is unceasing in his efforts to win over
the American Official authorities, and that the German Embassy
at Washington is far and away in the ascendant with the American
Government.
I hope I shall not be considered presumptuous in saying all this.
I humbly confess I am neither a diplomatist nor a politician. I
thank God I am neither. The former are senile, and the latter are
liars. But it all does seem such simple common sense to me that for
our Army we require mobile troops as against sedentary garrisons,
and that our military intervention in any very great Continental
struggle is unwise, remembering what Napoleon said on that point
with such emphasis and such sure conception of war, and that great
combined Naval and Military expeditions should be our rôle. In the
splendid words of Sir Edward Grey: “The British Army should be a
projectile to be fired by the British Navy.”
The foundation of our policy is that the communications of the
Empire must be kept open by a predominant Fleet, and _ipso facto_
such a Fleet will suffice to allay the fears of the “old women of
both sexes” in regard to the invasion of England or the invasion of
her Colonies.
NELSON’S COPENHAGEN
In May, 1907, England had seven “Dreadnoughts” ready for battle, and
Germany had not one. And England had flotillas of submarines peculiarly
adapted to the shallower German waters when Germany had none.
Even in 1908 Germany only had four submarines. At that time, in the
above letter I wrote to King Edward, I approached His Majesty, and
quoted certain apposite sayings of Mr. Pitt about dealing with the
probable enemy before he got too strong. It is admitted that it was
not quite a gentlemanly sort of thing for Nelson to go and destroy the
Danish Fleet at Copenhagen without notice, but “la raison du plus fort
est toujours la meilleure.”
Therefore, in view of the known steadfast German purpose, as always
unmitigatedly set forth by the German High Authority that it was
Germany’s set intention to make even England’s mighty Navy hesitate
at sea, it seemed to me simply a sagacious act on England’s part to
seize the German Fleet when it was so very easy of accomplishment
in the manner I sketched out to His Majesty, and probably without
bloodshed. But, alas! even the very whisper of it excited exasperation
against the supposed bellicose, but really peaceful, First Sea Lord,
and the project was damned. At that time, Germany was peculiarly
open to this “peaceful penetration.” A new Kiel Canal, at the cost
of many, many millions, had been rendered necessary by the advent of
the “Dreadnought”; but worse still for the Germans, it was necessary
for them to spend further vast millions in deepening not only the
approaches to the German Harbours, but the Harbours themselves, to
allow the German “Dreadnoughts,” when built, to be able to float. In
doing this, the Germans were thus forced to arrange that thirty-three
British pre-“Dreadnoughts” should be capable of attacking their shores,
which shallow water had previously denied them. Such, therefore, was
the time of stress and unreadiness in Germany that made it peculiarly
timely to repeat Nelson’s Copenhagen. Alas! we had no Pitt, no
Bismarck, no Gambetta! And consequently came those terrible years of
War, with millions massacred and maimed and many millions more of their
kith and kin with piercèd hearts and bereft of all that was mortal for
their joy.
QUEEN ALEXANDRA, LORD KNOLLYS, and SIR DIGHTON
PROBYN.
At the end of these short and much too scant memories of him whom Lord
Redesdale rightly calls in the letter I printed above
“_The best friend you ever had_,”
I can’t but allude to a Trio forming so great a part of his Glory.
Not to name them here would be “King Edward--an Unreality.” I could
not ask Queen Alexandra for permission either to print her Letters or
her Words, but I am justified in printing how her steadfast love, and
faith, and wonderful loyalty and fidelity to her husband have proved
how just is the judgment of Her Majesty by the Common People--“the most
loved Woman in the whole Nation.”
And then Lord Knollys and Sir Dighton Probyn, those two Great Pillars
of Wisdom and Judgment, who so reminded me, as they used to sit side by
side in the Royal Chapel, of those two who on either side held up the
arms of Moses in fighting the Amalekites:
“And Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands,
The one on the one side, and the other on the other side;
And his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.”
Yes! King Edward’s hands were held steady till the setting of his sun
on May 6th, 1910, and so did he “discomfit his enemies by their aid.”
For over forty years Lord Knollys played that great part in great
affairs which will occupy his Biographer with Admiration of his
Self-Effacement and unerring Judgment. Myself I owe him gratitude
inexpressible.
For myself, those Great Three ever live in my heart and ever will.
There are no such that I know of who are left to us to rise in their
place.