LONDON NAVAL TREATY.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19975, 9 July 1930, Page 11

LONDON NAVAL TREATY.

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE TO SENATE. ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO PACT EMPHASISED. (UHXTKS PEISHS ASSOCIATION —BT ELECTBIO TELEGBAPH —COPYRIGHT.) (Received July Bth, 7 p.m.) WASHINGTON, July 7. Obtaining a quorum for a special sesion of the Senate, to discuss the Naval Treaty, President Hoover delivered his message stating: "I should like to present my views on the treaty. This is necessary, due to the misinformation and misrepresentations which have been widely spread by those who are opposed to all reduction. The only alternative to this treaty is competitive building, with all its flow of hate, suspicion, ill-will, and ultimate disaster. History supports those who hold to the agreement as the path to peace. It is folly to think that because we are the richest nation we can outbuild the others. The very entry of the United States on such courses would invite the consolidation of the rest of the world against us. "If we fail now the world will again be plunged backward from its present programme toward peace," President Iloover said. "To those who seek earnestly ana properly for a reduction of warships, I would point out that, as compared with January Ist this year, the total aggregate navies of the three Powers will, under this treaty, have been reduced by nearly three hundred thousand tons. Had a settlement been made at Geneva in 1927 upon the only proposal then possible, the fleets of the three Powers would have been approximately 680,000 tons greater than under the Treaty now being considered. WASHINGTON, July 7. Should the treaty opponents decide to break the quorum at any time it would be almost within their power to do so, as only nine more than a quorum were present. REPLACEMENT OF CRUISERS. PRIME MINISTER ANSWERS QUESTIONS. (BBITISB OFMOIAL WIBZLESB.) RUGBY, July 7. In the House of Commons to-day various questions regarding the London Naval Treaty were addressed to the Prime Minister (Mr Ramsay MacDonald), who said that at the time when the preliminary negotiations took place, in August and September last, with the United States, the question of cruiser replacement was considered by the Admiralty, and the figure of 91,000 tons was put forward for new tonnage to be completed by the end of 1936. , 3 . .. This figure was employed in tne ensuing conversations, which had tor their object the removal of earlier difficulties in regard to cruiser limitations. These preliminary conversations were for the purpose only of clearing the ground prior to the London Conference. . ~ The figure of 91,000 tons was finally fixed during the conference, T v^ en > after negotiations with the United States and Japan, it was found that it met British replacement requirements within the terms of the treaty. The Prime Minister added that the forthcoming Imperial Conference might well, afford a convenient opportunity for discussing the naval building programme in the light of the London treaty. The definite question of discussing the limitations of tonnage which the treaty imposed could be raised by any Dominion that so desired. NEW ZEALAND'S REPRESENTATIVE. 1

MR MACDONALD QUESTIONED. LONDON, July 7. In the House of Commons, Captain H. Crookshank (Conservative) enquired the reasons for the Government's refusal to receive New Zealand's nominated representative at the London Naval Conference. Mr Ramsay Mac Donald: There never was, nor could be, any question of the Government declining to receive a representative nominated by New Zealand. _ Captain Crookshank: Do you mean to say the statements made in the House of Lords were quite incorrect!

Mr Mac Donald: No. Captain Crookshank: Then what do you mean? There was no reply.