Naval Defence Act 1889: Difference between revisions

Naval Defence Act 1889
Act of Parliament
	Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long title	An Act to make further provision for Naval Defence and defray the Expenses thereof.
Citation	52 & 53 Vict. c. 8
Dates
Royal assent	31 May 1889
Text of statute as originally enacted

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 18:05, 20 May 2024

The Naval Defence Act 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 8) was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It received royal assent on 31 May 1889 and formally adopted the "two-power standard" and increased the United Kingdom's naval strength. The standard called for the Royal Navy to maintain a number of battleships at least equal to the combined strength of the next two largest navies in the world, which then were France and Russia. An extra £20 million over the following four years were provided for ten new battleships, thirty-eight new cruisers, eighteen new torpedo boats and four new fast gunboats.^[1]^: 161 The two-power standard was maintained until disarmament began during the interwar period.^[2]

Background

It was passed under the government of Lord Salisbury and facilitated spending £21,500,000 over five years toward fleet expansion. Initially, Parliament opposed the increase in naval expenditures for several reasons.

Expert naval opinions presented to Parliament in December 1888 and February 1889 rendered critical views on the state of the navy. The buildup of the French and Russian navies was another factor pointing to purported British weakness. As a result, public support for proposed naval growth grew and placed further pressure on Parliament to support the act.^[3]^: 13

In reality, the two-power standard had been informally used over the past seventy years and during the 1850s, Britain had briefly met it. Britain already enjoyed international naval superiority. The Act reasserted the standard by its formal adoption and signalled an ambition to improve British naval supremacy to an even higher level.^[1]^: 161

Naval expansion

The expansion came in the form of ten battleships, forty-two cruisers and eighteen torpedo gunboats.^[1]^: 161 The battleships were the centrepiece of the legislation. Eight first-class battleships – seven of the Royal Sovereign class along with a half-sister, HMS Hood – and two second-class battleships, HMS Centurion and HMS Barfleur were ordered. The Royal Sovereign class was the most formidable capital ship of its day, fulfilling the role of a larger and faster battleship unmatched by those of Russia and France.^[1]^: 162 The cruisers were aimed at protecting British supply lines.

Nine first-class cruisers of the Edgar class, twenty-nine second-class cruisers of the Apollo and Astraea classes and four third-class cruisers of the Pearl class were provided.^[1]^: 161 The other eighteen torpedo gunboats served to support and protect the main battle fleet.

Rationale

The primary rationales were military and economic. The First Lord of the Admiralty, Lord George Hamilton, argued that the size and scope of the new building programme would deter the naval ambitions of other powers. By deterring other powers’ naval growth at present, the British would be able to spend less on shipbuilding in the future.^[3]^: 15

The large and quickly-generated funds voted by Parliament and guaranteed over a five-year period offered immediate economic incentives as well. Previous shipbuilding efforts had been halted due to an insufficient annual allowance. Without the funds to complete the warships, production took longer and cost more. By financing the expansion over a five-year period, residual balances from one year could be transferred over to the next, allowing production to continue uninterrupted, at greatly reduced costs.^[3]^: 15 That also aimed for the British completion of her warships more quickly than its rival powers. In theory, the scope and the speed of production would not only cut costs but also deter other powers from hoping to match British production.

Aftermath

In practice, there was a limited economic success but failed as a deterrent. The financing of the warships over five years allowed production to continue uninterrupted with low cost overruns and limited delays. A coinciding demand for merchant vessels, built in the same private shipyards as some of the warships, led to minimal increases in the cost of labour and material.^[3]^: 15 Lord George Hamilton's hopes of reducing future naval expenditures however, were dashed as the increased British production was soon matched by France and Russia. While Britain had completed 10 battleships and had another 3 either under construction or projected, the French and Russians had begun the construction of a combined 12 battleships, with another 3 projected.^[3]^: 16 Another British expansion, known as the Spencer Programme, followed in 1894 aimed to match foreign naval growth at a cost of over £31 million.^[1]^: 168 Instead of deterring the naval expansion of foreign powers, the act probably contributed to a naval arms race. Other powers including Germany and the United States bolstered their navies in the following years as Britain continued to increase its own naval expenditures.^{[citation needed]}

References

^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Sondhaus, Lawrence (2001). Naval Warfare, 1815-1914. Roudedge. ISBN 978-0415214780.
^ Hall, Christopher G.L. (1982). Britain, America and the search for comprehensive naval limitation, 1927-1936 (Doctoral thesis). University of Oxford. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e Sumida, Jon Tetsuro (1993). In Defence of Naval Supremacy: Finance, Technology and British Naval Policy, 1889-1914. Routledge. ISBN 978-1591148036.

Sources

Lambert, Nicholas A. Sir John Fisher's Naval Revolution, (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2002), 3-4, 29-30.
Marder, Arthur. The anatomy of British sea power : a history of British naval policy in the pre-dreadnought era, 1880-1905 (1976) ch 8
Parkinson, Roger. The Late Victorian Navy: the Pre-Dreadnought Era and the Origins of the First World War, (Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2008)
- James Levy, review of The Late Victorian Navy, by Roger Parkinson, Journal of Military History, January 2008, 293-294.

External links

[sondhaus-1] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Sondhaus, Lawrence (2001). Naval Warfare, 1815-1914. Roudedge. ISBN 978-0415214780.

[2] Hall, Christopher G.L. (1982). Britain, America and the search for comprehensive naval limitation, 1927-1936 (Doctoral thesis). University of Oxford. Retrieved 13 August 2022.

[sumida-3] Sumida, Jon Tetsuro (1993). In Defence of Naval Supremacy: Finance, Technology and British Naval Policy, 1889-1914. Routledge. ISBN 978-1591148036.

[1]

[2]

[3]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{short description|Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom}}
-'''The Naval Defence Act 1889''' was an [[Act of Parliament|Act]] of the [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]], instituted on May 31, 1889 to adopt formally the country's "[[Victorian Royal Navy#The "Two-Power Standard"|two-power standard]]" and increase the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland|United Kingdom]]'s naval strength. The standard called for the [[Royal Navy]] to maintain a number of battleships at least equal to the combined strength of the next two largest navies in the world which at that point were [[French navy#19th century revival|France]] and [[Russian Navy#Imperial Russian Navy|Russia]].  The act provided an extra £20 million over the following four years for ten new battleships, thirty-eight new cruisers, eighteen new torpedo boats and four new fast gunboats.<ref>Sondhaus, p. 161.</ref>
+{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2017}}
+{{Use British English|date=December 2017}}
+{{Infobox UK legislation
+| short_title           = Naval Defence Act 1889
+| type                  = Act
+| parliament            = Parliament of the United Kingdom
+| long_title            = An Act to make further provision for Naval Defence and defray the Expenses thereof.
+| year                  = 1889
+| citation              = [[52 & 53 Vict.]] c. 8
+| introduced_commons    =
+| introduced_lords      =
+| territorial_extent    =
+| royal_assent          = 31 May 1889
+| commencement          =
+| expiry_date           =
+| repeal_date           =
+| amends                =
+| replaces              =
+| amendments            =
+| repealing_legislation =
+| related_legislation   =
+| status                =
+| legislation_history   =
+| theyworkforyou        =
+| millbankhansard       =
+| original_text         = http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/tfs/index.php/Naval_Defence_Act,_1889#Text_of_Act
+| revised_text          =
+| use_new_UK-LEG        =
+| UK-LEG_title          =
+| collapsed             =
+}}
+The '''Naval Defence Act 1889''' ([[52 & 53 Vict.]] c. 8) was an [[Act of Parliament (UK)|act]] of the [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]]. It received royal assent on 31 May 1889 and formally adopted the "[[two-power standard]]" and increased the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland|United Kingdom]]'s naval strength. The standard called for the [[Royal Navy]] to maintain a number of battleships at least equal to the combined strength of the next two largest navies in the world, which then were [[French Navy#19th century|France]] and [[Imperial Russian Navy|Russia]]. An extra £20 million over the following four years were provided for ten new battleships, thirty-eight new cruisers, eighteen new torpedo boats and four new fast gunboats.<ref name=sondhaus>{{cite book |last=Sondhaus|first=Lawrence|date=2001|title= Naval Warfare, 1815-1914|publisher=Roudedge|isbn=978-0415214780}}</ref>{{rp|161}} The two-power standard was maintained until disarmament began during the interwar period.<ref>{{cite thesis |last=Hall|first=Christopher G.L.|date=1982|title=Britain, America and the search for comprehensive naval limitation, 1927-1936|type=Doctoral thesis|publisher=University of Oxford|url=https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:7092ba47-79eb-4709-9344-58f1c9dc0fc3|access-date=2022-08-13}}</ref>
-[[Image:HMSRoyalSovereign1897.jpg|thumb| The Battleship HMS ''Royal Sovereign'']]
+[[File:HMSRoyalSovereign1897.jpg|thumb| The battleship [[HMS Royal Sovereign (1891)|HMS ''Royal Sovereign'']]]]
 ==Background==
+It was passed under the government of [[Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury|Lord Salisbury]] and facilitated spending £21,500,000 over five years toward fleet expansion. Initially, Parliament opposed the increase in naval expenditures for several reasons.
-The act was passed under the government of [[Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury|Lord Salisbury]] and facilitated spending £21,500,000 over five years toward fleet expansion.  Initially Parliament opposed the increase in naval expenditures.  Parliament’s stance on the issue shifted due to several factors.  First, expert naval opinions presented to Parliament in December 1888 and February 1889 rendered critical views on the state of the navy.  The buildup of the French and Russian navies was another factor pointing to purported British weakness.  As a result, public support for proposed naval growth grew and placed further pressure on Parliament to support the act.<ref>Sumida, p. 13.</ref>
+Expert naval opinions presented to Parliament in December 1888 and February 1889 rendered critical views on the state of the navy. The buildup of the French and Russian navies was another factor pointing to purported British weakness. As a result, public support for proposed naval growth grew and placed further pressure on Parliament to support the act.<ref name=sumida>{{cite book |last=Sumida|first=Jon Tetsuro|date=1993|title=In Defence of Naval Supremacy: Finance, Technology and British Naval Policy, 1889-1914|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1591148036}}</ref>{{rp|13}}
-In reality the two-power standard had been informally used over the past seventy years and for a brief period during the 1850s Britain had met the standard.  Britain already enjoyed international naval superiority.  The Naval Defence Act reasserted the standard by its formal adoption and signalled an ambition to improve British naval supremacy to an even higher level.<ref>Sondhaus, p. 161.</ref>
+In reality, the two-power standard had been informally used over the past seventy years and during the 1850s, Britain had briefly met it. Britain already enjoyed international naval superiority. The Act reasserted the standard by its formal adoption and signalled an ambition to improve British naval supremacy to an even higher level.<ref name=sondhaus/>{{rp|161}}<!-- expand this section to include more discussion of the politics of naval expansion; link to the Scramble for Africa and Victorian colonialism -->
 ==Naval expansion==
+The expansion came in the form of ten battleships, forty-two cruisers and eighteen torpedo gunboats.<ref name =sondhaus/>{{rp|161}} The battleships were the centrepiece of the legislation. Eight first-class battleships – seven of the [[Royal Sovereign-class battleship|''Royal Sovereign'' class]] along with a half-sister, HMS ''Hood'' – and two second-class battleships, [[HMS Centurion (1892)|HMS ''Centurion'']] and [[HMS Barfleur (1892)|HMS ''Barfleur'']] were ordered. The ''Royal Sovereign'' class was the most formidable capital ship of its day, fulfilling the role of a larger and faster battleship unmatched by those of Russia and France.<ref name=sondhaus/>{{rp|162}} The cruisers were aimed at protecting British supply lines.
-The expansion came in the form of ten battleships, forty-two cruisers, and eighteen torpedo gunboats.<ref>Sondhaus, p. 161.</ref>  The battleships were the centrepiece of the legislation.  Eight first-class battleships of the ''[[Royal Sovereign class battleship|Royal Sovereign class]]'' and two-second class battleships, the ''[[Centurion class battleship#HMS Centurion|Centurion]]'' and ''[[Centurion class battleship#HMS Barfleur|Barfleur]]'' were ordered. The ''Royal Sovereign'' class was the most formidable capital ship of its day, fulfilling the role of a larger and faster battleship unmatched by those of Russia and France.<ref>Sondhaus, p. 162.</ref>  The cruisers were aimed at protecting British supply lines.  The act provided for nine first-class cruisers of the [[Edgar class cruiser|''Edgar'' class]], twenty-nine second-class cruisers of the ''[[Apollo class cruiser|Apollo]]'' and [[Astraea class cruiser|''Astraea'']] classes, and four third-class cruisers of the ''[[Pearl class cruiser|Pearl class]]''.<ref>Sondhaus, p. 161.</ref>  The remaining eighteen torpedo gunboats served to support and protect the main battle fleet.
+Nine first-class cruisers of the [[Edgar-class cruiser|''Edgar'' class]], twenty-nine second-class cruisers of the [[Apollo-class cruiser|''Apollo'']] and [[Astraea-class cruiser|''Astraea'']] classes and four third-class cruisers of the [[Pearl-class cruiser|''Pearl'' class]] were provided.<ref name=sondhaus/>{{rp|161}} The other eighteen torpedo gunboats served to support and protect the main battle fleet.
 ==Rationale==
+The primary rationales were military and economic. The [[First Lord of the Admiralty]], [[Lord George Hamilton]], argued that the size and scope of the new building programme would deter the naval ambitions of other powers. By deterring other powers’ naval growth at present, the British would be able to spend less on shipbuilding in the future.<ref name=sumida/>{{rp|15}}
-The primary rationales behind the Naval Defence Act were military and economic.  Militarily the [[First Lord of the Admiralty]], [[Lord George Hamilton|George Hamilton]], argued that the size and scope of this new building programme would deter the naval ambitions of other powers.  By deterring other powers’ naval growth at present, the British would be able to spend less on shipbuilding in the future.<ref>Sumida, p. 15.</ref>  The large and quickly generated funds voted by Parliament and guaranteed over a five-year period offered immediate economic incentives as well.  Previous shipbuilding efforts had been halted due to an insufficient annual allowance.  Without the funds to complete the warships, production took longer and cost more.  By financing the expansion over a five-year period, residual balances from one year could be transferred over to the next, allowing production to continue uninterrupted at greatly reduced costs.<ref>Sumida, p. 15.</ref>   This method also aimed for the British completion of her warships more quickly than its rival powers.  In theory, the scope and speed of production would not only cut costs but also deter other powers hoping to match British production.
+The large and quickly-generated funds voted by Parliament and guaranteed over a five-year period offered immediate economic incentives as well. Previous shipbuilding efforts had been halted due to an insufficient annual allowance. Without the funds to complete the warships, production took longer and cost more. By financing the expansion over a five-year period, residual balances from one year could be transferred over to the next, allowing production to continue uninterrupted, at greatly reduced costs.<ref name=sumida/>{{rp|15}} That also aimed for the British completion of her warships more quickly than its rival powers. In theory, the scope and the speed of production would not only cut costs but also deter other powers from hoping to match British production.
+==Aftermath==
-==Results and consequences==
+In practice, there was a limited economic success but failed as a deterrent. The financing of the warships over five years allowed production to continue uninterrupted with low cost overruns and limited delays. A coinciding demand for merchant vessels, built in the same private shipyards as some of the warships, led to minimal increases in the cost of labour and material.<ref name=sumida/>{{rp|15}} Lord George Hamilton's hopes of reducing future naval expenditures however, were dashed as the increased British production was soon matched by [[French Third Republic|France]] and [[Russian Empire|Russia]]. While Britain had completed 10 battleships and had another 3 either under construction or projected, the French and Russians had begun the construction of a combined 12 battleships, with another 3 projected.<ref name=sumida/>{{rp|16}} Another British expansion, known as the [[Spencer Programme]], followed in 1894 aimed to match foreign naval growth at a cost of over £31 million.<ref name=sondhaus/>{{rp|168}} Instead of deterring the naval expansion of foreign powers, the act probably contributed to a naval arms race. Other powers including [[German Empire|Germany]] and the [[United States]] bolstered their navies in the following years as Britain continued to increase its own naval expenditures.{{Citation needed|date=September 2012}}
-In practice, the Naval Defence Act of 1889 had limited economic success but failed as a deterrent.  The financing of the warships over five years allowed production to continue uninterrupted with low cost overruns and limited delays.  A coinciding demand for merchant vessels built in the same private shipyards as some of the warships led to minimal increases in the cost of labour and material.<ref>Sumida, p. 15.</ref>  Lord Hamilton’s hopes of reducing future naval expenditures were dashed as the increased British production saw matched attempts at naval expansion by [[France]] and [[Russia]].  In fact, the French and Russians built a combined twelve battleships in the period from 1893–94, compared to Britain’s ten.<ref>Sumida, p. 16.</ref>  Another British expansion, known as the Spencer Programme, followed in 1894 aimed to match foreign naval growth at a cost of over £31 million.<ref>Sondhaus 168.</ref>  Instead of deterring the naval expansion of foreign powers, Britain’s Naval Defence Act contributed to a naval arms race.  Other powers including [[Germany]] and the [[United States]] bolstered their navies in the following years as Britain continued to increase its own naval expenditures.{{Citation needed|date=September 2012}}
 ==See also==
-*[[Victorian Royal Navy]]
+* [[History of the Royal Navy]]
-*[[History of the Royal Navy#Pax Britannica, 1815–1895|History of the Royal Navy Pax Britannica, 1815–1895]]
-*[[History of the Royal Navy#Age of the battleship, 1895–1919|History of the Royal Navy Age of the battleship, 1895–1919]]
 ==References==
 {{reflist}}
-==Further reading==
+==Sources==
-*Lambert, Nicholas A. ''Sir John Fisher's Naval Revolution'', (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2002), 3-4, 29-30.
+* Lambert, Nicholas A. ''Sir John Fisher's Naval Revolution'', (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2002), 3-4, 29-30.
-* Marder, Arthur. ''The anatomy of British sea power : a history of British naval policy in the pre-dreadnought era, 1880-1905'' (1976) ch 8
+* [[Arthur Marder|Marder, Arthur]]. ''The anatomy of British sea power : a history of British naval policy in the pre-dreadnought era, 1880-1905'' (1976) ch 8
-*Parkinson, Roger. ''The Late Victorian Navy: the Pre-Dreadnought Era and the Origins of the First World War'', (Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2008)
+* Parkinson, Roger. ''The Late Victorian Navy: the Pre-Dreadnought Era and the Origins of the First World War'', (Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2008)
-**James Levy, review of ''The Late Victorian Navy'', by Roger Parkinson, ''Journal of Military History'', January 2008, 293-294.
+** James Levy, review of ''The Late Victorian Navy'', by Roger Parkinson, ''Journal of Military History'', January 2008, 293-294.
-*Sondhaus, Lawrence. ''Naval Warfare, 1815-1914'', (New York: Routledge, 2001)
-*Sumida, Jon Tetsuro. ''In Defence of Naval Supremacy: Finance, Technology and British Naval Policy, 1889-1914'', (New York: Routledge, 1993)
 ==External links==
 * [http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/uk-rn-policy2.htm British Naval Policy 1890-1920]
-* [http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/sitecore/content/home/about-the-royal-navy/organisation/life-in-the-royal-navy/history/historic-periods/1815-1914 Royal Navy Website: Maintaining Naval Supremacy 1815-1914]
+* [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140410071932/http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/sitecore/content/home/about-the-royal-navy/organisation/life-in-the-royal-navy/history/historic-periods/1815-1914 Royal Navy Website: Maintaining Naval Supremacy 1815-1914]
 {{UK legislation}}
 [[Category:United Kingdom Acts of Parliament 1889]]
-[[Category:History of the Royal Navy]]
+[[Category:19th-century history of the Royal Navy]]
 [[Category:1889 in military history]]
+[[Category:May 1889 events]]
 [[Category:19th-century military history of the United Kingdom]]
 [[Category:United Kingdom military law]]
 [[Category:British defence policymaking]]
+[[Category:Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury]]
-[[de:Naval Defence Act 1889]]
-[[fr:Naval Defence Act de 1889]]
-[[ru:Акт о морской обороне (1889)]]