Naval Science Head Compares Adequate Coastal Defense to Insurance; Favors Building Program

"An adequate navy is like fire insurance; we need the proposed $800,000,000 building program to protect our coasts," Captain Chester H. Keppler, professor of Naval Science and Tactics, said in an interview yesterday.

"In 1921-22 other nations were willing to disarm because all they had to do was to tear up blueprints, while we actually scrapped battleships. And now, when it seems likely that Japan is exceeding her quota, we haven't even built up to our treaty limit."

In the advent of Anglo-American naval cooperation, Captain Keppler predicted that the combined fleets would easily dominate the seas. "We must remember, however, that the size of a navy isn't the only factor in its effectiveness," he said. "Both Italy and Japan occupy important strategic positions.

Battleship Fleet Backbone

"The battleship is still the backbone of the fleet. It occupies the same position in the navy an infantry unit does in the army. Recent wars have shown that bombing civilian populations from the air is useless from a purely strategical standpoint.

"It's just as pointless to have a navy insufficient for our needs as to have defective or antiquated fire equipment or inadequate police departments in every city or community." Admitting that a naval race would raise the rate on our naval "insurance," Captain Keppler said that the increase is only relative. He pointed out that naval expenditures are only a very small fraction of the national budget.

Declining to comment on the problems of international politics involved in any naval program, he said that it is the role of subordinates to keep out of matters of policy.