NAVY OF FRANCE.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 74, 27 March 1923, Page 5

NAVY OF FRANCE.

TREATY NOT POPULAR.

DEFENCE OF THE IS!LANDS. (By Cable.—Fress Association.—Copyright.*

LONDON", March 20. The Paris correspondent of the "Morning Post" states that the Washington Xaval Agreement is not popular in France. The average Frenchman does not see why hi* country should a document limiting naval construction without a return. The "Temps" points out that the United States gives France no guarantee for the immunity of her island possessions in the Pacific, and many Frenchmen do not see why France should not build submarines.

The. "Matin" recalls that 17.1 German submarines held the most colossal naval combination in the world in check, and 175 submarines cost the same as six battleships of the latest type. The general idea is to arid a clause pointing out that a Franee \»»xs not bound by the convention after 193ti, otherwise it would be assumed that France assented to permanent limitation of her fleet.

AMERICAN GUN PLATFORMS. PLANS FOR RAISING. NKW YORK, March 26. The Washington correspondent of the Xew York ''Times'' reports that an impression prevails that Mr. (.'. K. Hughes, Secretary of State, who is now studying the technical clauses of the Washington Xaval Treaty, will decii'e that the proposed elevation of films ill American capital ship?, provided for in the appropriation for naval improvements, requested by the Secretary of the Xavy, Mr. K. Denby. would lx? a violation of the spirit, if not of the letter' of the treat v.

It is understood that his conclusions will 1 ho communicated to the. President, Mr. W. <";. Harding, who is expected to order the navy to abandon its plans.-'and (he expenditure of <>,5OO,(KIO dollars, wliioh Congress appropriated for that purpose. Mr. Hughes has been greatly disturbed by the revelation that Britain has not heen altering her capita] ships, and that the United States Xaval Department was misinformed in that particular. Ho feels that if the United States made naval chances, they would lead to similar activities on the part of other Powers, thus resulting in naval competition and negation of the purpose of the Washington Treaty.