The “Monstrous” Cruisers so Derided in Parliament
Note.—When I came to the Admiralty as First Sea Lord in October, 1914—three months after the War had begun—I obtained the very cordial concurrence and help of Mr. Churchill and Mr. Lloyd George (Chancellor of the Exchequer) in an unparalleled building programme of 612 vessels of types necessary for a Big Offensive in Northern Waters (the decisive theatre of the War). Coal-burning Battleships then under construction were re-designed to burn oil, with great increase of their efficiency and speed, and the last two of these eight Battleships were scrapped (the “Renown” and “Repulse”), and, together with three new vessels—the “Courageous,” “Glorious,” and “Furious”—were arranged to have immense speed, heavy guns and unprecedented light draught of water, thus enabling them to fulfil the very work described in this letter below of absolutely disposing of hostile light cruisers and following them into shallow waters. They were also meant for service in the Baltic.
Ever since their production became known, Naval critics in both Houses of Parliament (quite ignorant of new Naval strategical and tactical requirements) have consistently crabbed these new mighty Engines of War as the emanations of a sick brain, “senile and autocratic!” Hence the value of the following letter from an eyewitness of high rank:
To Lord Fisher from a Naval Officer
December 12th, 1917.
Dear Lord Fisher,
In the late action in the Heligoland Bight the only heavy ships which could get up with the enemy were the “Repulse,” “Courageous” and “Glorious” (the “Renown” and “Furious” were elsewhere).[14] They very nearly brought off an important “coup!” Without them our light cruisers would not have had a “look in,” or perhaps would have been “done in!” When public speakers desired to decry the work of the Board of which you were a Member in 1914 and 1915, and particularly that part of the work for which you were so personally responsible as this new type of heavy ship, no condemnation was too heavy to heap on your design!
It is a pleasure to me, therefore, to be able to let you know that they have fully justified your anticipation of their success.
I trust you are quite well and will believe me,
Yours sincerely,
——.
Lord Fisher to a Friend.
August 22nd, 1917.
My Beloved Friend,
I am scanning the dark horizon for some faint glimmer of the end of the War. Not a sign of a glimmer! So far as the Germans are concerned, there is indisputable authority for stating that Germany is equal to a seven years’ war! Are we? So far, alas! we have had no Nelson, no Napoleon, no Pitt! The one only “substantial victory” of ours in the War (and, as Nelson wished, it was not a Victory—it was Annihilation!) was the destruction of Admiral von Spee’s Armada off the Falkland Islands.... And the above accomplished under the sole direction of a Septuagenarian First Sea Lord, who was thought mad for denuding the Grand Fleet of our fastest Battle Cruisers to send them 14,000 miles on a supposed wild goose chase.... And how I was execrated for inventing the Battle Cruisers! “Monstrous Cruisers,” they called them! To this day such asses of this kidney calumniate them, and their still more wonderful successors, the “Repulse,” “Renown,” “Furious,” “Glorious,” and “Courageous.” How would they have saved England without these Fast Battle Cruisers?... And yet, dear friend, what comes to the Author of the Scene?
The words of Montaigne!
“Qui de nous n’a sa ‘terre promise,’
Son jour d’extase,
Et sa fin en exil?”
Yours, etc.,
(Signed) Fisher.
Note.—Much talk of a recent mot at a great dinner-table, where society’s hatred of Lord Fisher was freely canvassed, and his retirement (in May 1915) much applauded. “I did not know,” remarked a statesman, “that Mr. Pitt ever put Lord Nelson on the retired list.”