CAB38-23 — Page 17

Page 17

Page 17

Page 17

SIR ARTHUR NICOLSON said that the British Minister at Peking had quite recently expressed the view that the two extra battalions could not be withdrawn at present.

(Conclusion.)

(1.) It is improbable that any Power other than China could attack Hong Kong with a force of more than 2,000 men under present conditions.

(2.) The development of the military resources of China should be kept under careful observation, particularly in the neighbourhood of Hong Kong.

VI. THE AIR COMMITTEE.

THE CONSTITUTION, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURE (C.I.D. Paper 162-B.) COLONEL SEELY said that, following the precedent of the Home Ports Defence Committee and the Oversea Defence Committee, the approval of the Committee was asked for the constitution, functions, and procedure of the Air Committee. The Committee met about once a month. lle did not feel quite sure that they were getting quite full value for the efforts which were being made to establish a satisfactory Air Service. The Committee could only recomiend, it had no executive power. There was consequently some lack of co-ordination, loss of opportunity, and waste of energy. The total expenditure now amounted to about a million pounds, and he was inclined to think that the time had almost come to constitute a joint Executive Department of the Admiralty and War Office or an Air Department.

MR. CHURCHILL said that he had originally been strongly in favour of a joint Naval and Military Air Service, but the lines of development of flying machines in the two Services were divergent. Naval effort was now concentrated on the Hydro-Aeroplane. In this branch we were he believed ahead of other nations. That development did not concern the Army, which required machines to alight on the land, not on the sea. Observation on land was also quite different to observation on the sea. Except, therefore, in experimental work, he did not think that the Navy profited in any way by co-operation with the Army in this Service.

LORD HALDANE said that while he appreciated Mr. Churchill's point of view, it was most necessary to prevent overlapping. The organization which had been devised was a very good one. There was the Joint Central School, presided over by a Naval Officer, where the elementary instruction common to all flying was given, and there were the Naval and Military Schools, where the instruction was more specialised; while the Air Committee was there to co-ordinate departmental effort and generally to advise. He thought it would be a great mistake to break up this organization after such a very brief experience.

COLONEL SEELY said that he did not agree that the development of Naval and Military flying would permanently tend to be on divergent lines. The machine of the future would probably be quite interchangeable, able to alight either on land or on water. Ability to scout over the sea would certainly be necessary for the Army as well as for the Navy. In view of the speed and radius of action of an aeroplane the fact that the Central School was situated inland was of small conse- quence. He was strongly in favour of the maintenance of the closest co-operation between the two services.

THE PRIME MINISTER said that the document which they were asked to approve represented existing facts. He did not gather that there was any immediate idea of altering the present organization.

MR. CHURCHILL replied in the negative.

supreme.

PRINCE LOUIS OF BATTENBERG said that one Department must be

A joint concern had been tried at Woolwich, but had failed. THE PRIME MINISTER said that the present organization had better continue for the present.

•

Page 17

Page 17