Two Warships Required.

New York Times 100 years ago today, July 30, 1912:
    One battleship this year is not enough. Yet many members of Congress who favor the building of at least two are hoping for nothing better than a compromise on one, as a result of the revolt in the majority against the rule of the caucus that no new ships should be built this year. The Navy bill will come up again in the House on Thursday, and by that time we hope that Mr. Sulzer and his associates who do not believe that the upbuilding of the navy should be hindered by partisan bias or personal pique will have made the issue plain to enough members to assure a vote in favor of two ships.
    The Democrats who have voted against the building of the warships are true reactionaries, who, by reverting to the "early manner" of their party, in behaving after the manner of the donkey, have shown their lack of an intelligent appreciation of the situation. The position of the United States among the Powers has changed considerably since the Jackson epoch. We have larger duties to perform, we have acquired "possessions," we shall soon have the Panama Canal to protect. Our navy must not be permitted to decline. So far as we have been able to ascertain there are no two sound opinions on this matter among the people of the country. A few fanatical persons here and there would like to see both the Navy and the army abolished in the cause of Peace. But the only way to secure peace is to have the means of defense ever ready.
    Two warships at least should be built every year until our navy is made strong enough to meet any emergency. The proposed compromise on one warship this year should not be accepted unless there is an agreement to build three in 1913-14.