LIMITATION OF NAVIES.

Press, 1 February 1930, Page 17

LIMITATION OF NAVIES.

A COMPROMISE PLAN. FRENCH PROPOSAL OUTLINED.

(TTjriTK) J'BESS ASSOCIATION' —BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH—COPVB.IGHT.) (Received January 31st. 10.25 p.m.) LONDON, January 31. Briefly put, the compromise plan which is clumsily called the French ! transactional proposal, provides that eu;:h Power shall specii'v the maximum figure of its total tonnage which it will undertake not to exceed. Each Power will also submit figures tor categories of ships, the tonnage of which must not exceed the total tonnage. The transference of a certain agreed percentage, say ten per cent., will be allowable from one category to another, but only with due notice ana a numiver of safeguards. Any increase in tonnage in one category must be accompanied by a corresponding decrease in another. The categories will j remain fixed for the duration of the : treaty, and thereafter alterable only by twelve months' notice to the ■. Leasnie of Nations. The French want deviation among all categories, but this is not likely to be ag'-eed to. The categories suggested are : (1) Battleships of 10,000 tons and over, or ships carrying eight inch guns and over. (2) Cruisers carrying guns above six inch calibre. (3) Surface craft carrying less than six inch guns, including destroyers (4) Aircraft carriers. (5) Submarines. Mine sweepers and various small craft. It is hoped that this division of cruiser categories will help to solve the problem outstanding between Britain and the United States, while the grouping of light cruisers and destrovers will meet the French naval requirements. Whether the categories stand as here detailed remains to be seen. It is known that the original British list distinguished between battleships and eight inch gun cruisers. A great advance towards an agreement among the nations lies in the fact that while the French hitherto argued that limitation was only able to be achieved by total tonnage, leavins any .State to allot the tonnage according "to its own requirements, while Britain held that limitation could best be effected within categories. Now a method has been approved which combines both ideas THE PLENARY SESSION. TONNAGE PROBLEMS DISCUSSED (BRITISH OmCIiL WIBELZSS.) KUGBY, January 30. When opening this morning the third plenary session of the Naval Conference, Mr Bamsay Mac Donald said that it was called to deal with the agenda, which had been circulated. The only item on the agenda was that of consideration of general questions affecting the work of the Conference, and under this heading France, Britain, and Italyeach had given notice of proposals which they wish to advance, as follows: France. (1) A system of global tonnage and the French delegation's transactional proposal. (2) What classification was to be adopted. (3) The amount and conditions of transfer. Great Britain. A system of limitation by categories. Italy. (1) Determination of ratios. (2) Determination of levels of total tonnages of the several countries. LONDON, January 30. At the plenary session of the Naval Conference at St. James's Palace, Mr Mac Donald, in the course of his opening address, explained that the different interests and relationships between the Powers were exceedingly intricate, and could not be dealt with straight. away in open Conference. Exchanges of views with the object of removing misunderstandings and paving the way to compromise or agreement had thus far proved most gratifying. Signor Grandi said that the French and British proposals dealt virtually with the same problem, namely, global tonnage, or categories. He also referred to the French intermediate idea of a transactional basis. Italy dealt rather with the principle of limitation j on a maximum level. Her problem was essentially political, namely acceptance or restriction of the funda- ; mental rights inherent in national I sovereignty. They therefore had to j solve fiTst and foremost what basis of reciprocal relative strength each was , prepared to accept in the limitation of ! freedom of action in the matter of armaments. For Italy it was no question of procedure, but of substance. But as some thought it more prudent at present to refrain from discussing the" two points, Italy was prepared to await methods of procedure, but did not see her way at present to commit herself on the question of method, or any special point of the disarmament problem until the two fundamental questions of global tonnage or categories had been settled. Mr H. L. Stimson proposed that questions of method of procedure, particularly the French and British suggestions for limitation by global and category methods respectively, and France s proposal for the method of transfer from one category to another be referred to a committee representing all delegations for examination and report to Conference. Mr Hugh Gibson said that America had consistently favoured the category method as best calculated to reduce international competition and feelings of mistrust and suspicion. By the cate- | gorv method the nations knew exactly what the others were contemplating, but the global system would leave an unknown situation, causing fear and anxiety, and ultimately building competition. Mr Stimson's resolution was adopted. M. Tardieu testified to the French delegation's interest in Mr Gibson's speech, and added that categorical limitation was more satisfactory fcr the naval Powers, but global tonnage was better for those whose navies were not so important. The French delegation desired that the matter be referred back to the committee. Mr A. V. Alexander, First Lord of the Admiraltv, thanked Mr Gibson, and paid a tribute to the Extreme friendliness and helpfulness of all the delegates. Britain's and the Dominions' need of sea security was vital. Her proposals were based on the categorical svstem, in which she completely "greed with America and Japan. The important aspect of Britain's proposal was that within each category the maximum tonnage of the individual unit was strictlv limited, and should be at the lowest* figure consistent with the exercise of the duties of.that unit. Britain did not object to the proposal to transfer the tonnage of one class of snip to another according, to needs and, in view of the progress made at

the Conference, was fully prepared to consider some system of tonnage transfer, if applied to the least powerful type of ships. He hoped that this would enable the countries with legs powerful navies to meet their needs and requirements. He could say on behalf of Britain that she welcomed discussion on the transactional proposals to which M. Tardieu had referred and the appointment of a committee as moved by Mr Stimson. 'Mr MacDonakl announced that the Conference's conversations would be continued, and from these further business would arise which the Conference would again be summoned to discuss. The plenary session then adjourned sine die. The French proposals are understood to be that each Power should submit her maximum total tonnage by categories, which it would not exceed foT the duration of the Treaty. Thereafter each Power would be permitted to de viate, or transfer a certain agreed percentage as between these categories, after informing the other Powers. A PROMISING OUTLOOK. TURN IN THE TIDE IMMINENT. (UNITED PBESS ASSOCIATION—BY ELBCTBIC TELEGRAPH —COPTBIOHT.) LONDON, January 30. The plenary session of the Naval Conference and introduction to today's proceedings leave an atmosphere of hope that Mr Ramsay Mac Donald's optimism will be realised. Speaking to Pressmen after the session, Mr MaeDonald indicated that they were approaching settlement of a measure which hitherto had defied solution. This was regarded as expressing a feeling existing throughout the Conference that a big turn in the tide was imminent. England, France, and America are now much closer together than ever before, while Japan has always been anxious for the closest co-operation. Thus, many now consider that there is not only an extremely promising outlook, but that the general question of naval disarmament has reached a stage well beyond anything hitherto. Italy appears to be to some extent an impeding agent, with a strong desire to settle the parity problem with France, and the impression is fast growing that it is already a four-to-one Conference, in the face of which Italv can hardly hold up progress. The admission of the Press to the plenary sessions must not be construed" into the belief that they are in ftjie full confidence of the Conference. Undoubtedly, had the plenary session been private, there would have been much more open speaking, and the delegates do not disguise the fact that straight speaking, which alone removes misunderstandings, will be strictly confined to private meetings.

DOMINION DELEGATES TO CONFER.

(Received January 31st, 11.35 p.m.) LONDON, January 30. There will be a conference of Dominion delegates to the Naval Conference at No. 10 Downing Street tomorrow morning. Mr J. E. Fenton says that nothing affecting the Australian Fleet has yet been mentioned, and nothing has been decided as to who will represent the Dominions on the Agenda Committee. JOURNALISTS LUNCH WITH DELEGATES. (Received January 31st, 10.50 p.m.) LONDON, January 30. Journalists representing over thirty nationalities lunched with the delegates to the Naval Conference, including Mr T. M. Wilford (New Zealand). Mr Wakatsuki responded on behalf of the delegates.

LIMITATION BY CATEGORIES

FAVOURABLE AMERICAN COMMENT. (UXIXED PRK33 ASSOCIATION—BT ELECntIO TBLKOBAPH —COPTBIGHT.) (Received January 31at, 9.30 p.m.) NEW YOEK, January 31. The Washington correspondent of the "New York Times," commenting on Mr Gibson's speech at London, says:— "The system of limitations by flexible categories within total or global tonnages is one which meets with favour here, although it is evident that caution will have to be exercised in applying it if trouble is to be avoided among 1 big naval men in the United States and their sympathisers in the Senate. The percentage of transfers from one class of ships to another must relatively be small if the general purpose of eliminating competitive naval programmes is to be achieved. There would be a great difficulty in obtaining the consent of Senate to any naval treaty with too wide a latitude."