New York Times Current History: The European War, Vol. 8, Pt. 2, No. 1, July 1918Various
History
New York Times Current History: The European War, Vol. 8, Pt. 2, No. 1, July 1918
Various
World War, 1914-1918
Mr. Frothingham maintains that the German fleet came out with the
object, and no other, of engaging the British fleet, a force known
to be greatly superior in number of ships and power of ordnance. He
apparently, but not quite clearly, suggests that the Germans knew how
the British fleet would be employed and how it would be disposed. It
would be difficult to put any other construction on the words--"With
the object of engaging a fleet usually so disposed and so employed,
the Germans came out from their bases." Surely this is a pure
assumption which can only be supported by other assumptions founded on
improbability rather than on probability. There is another assumption
which is more plausible and which is supported by evidence--indirect,
it is true, but copious. The war had been going on for more than a year
and a half, and yet the German High Sea Fleet, in spite of its name,
had sedulously refrained from venturing on the high seas. This made it
the object of perpetual taunts by the enemies of Germany. There was
some not completely suppressed restlessness among the German people.
It has been an almost invariable rule in war that the fleet which keeps
on lying in port is eventually forced to put to sea by public opinion.
The tone and wording of many official German statements justify the
conclusion that the German fleet put to sea with the object, not of
meeting the British fleet, but of returning to port with the assertion
that the British fleet had kept out of the way and that the North Sea
had been "swept" for it in vain. Contrary to the probable expectation,
Sir David Beatty's force was met with and there seemed a chance of
being able to attack him with the whole strength of the German Navy.
Unforeseen opportunities of the kind have frequently occurred in naval
war, and may be expected frequently to occur again.
FRENCH EXPERT'S OPINION
Here may be quoted some observations, dated March 11, 1918, by the
very distinguished French flag officer Vice Admiral E. F. Fournier, in
a preface to a translation of an account of the general work of the
British Navy:
Je m'associe également aux regrets de l'auteur de cette notice
qu'une ombre injustifiée ait été portée sur le tableau, si
flatteur pour l'amour-propre de la Grande Bretagne, par certains
critiques de la presse anglaise sur la bataille du Jutland. Je
le fais d'autant plus volontiers que, dès la nouvelle de cette
memorable rencontre navale, j'écrivis dans le Matin un article ou
je vantais l'esprit de décision et la résolution si opportune de
l'Amiral Beatty, n'hésitant pas à se jeter, malgré l'infériorité
de ses forces, à la tête de la flotte allemande toute entière pour
la contrecarrer dans ses desseins, en s'y accrochant énergiquement
jusqu'a l'arrivée du renfort anglais, comme l'eût fait, sans aucun
doute, Nelson lui-même, en pareil cas.
TRANSLATION:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account