REDUCTION OF NAVIES

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 185, 3 May 1929, Page 9

REDUCTION OF NAVIES

EFFECT OF PROPOSALS ON SHIPBUILDING BRITISH PROGRAMME TO PROCEED • PREMATURE TO TAKE ANY STEPS YET The First Lord of the Admiralty, replying to questions in the House of Commons, said tho work of shipbuilding would proceed. He was opposed to taking action prematurely. (British Official Wireless,) Rugby, May 1. In the House of Commons, Commander Kenworthy (Lab.) asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the proposals for naval limitations and reductions made at Geneva by the American delegate to the Preparatory Commission on Disarmament, it was proposed to retain the present programme of warship construction in this country. Mr. Bridgeman replied that the work of shipbuilding would proceed. It was not, however, proposed to lay down ships of the 1929 programme until towards the end of the financial year. Commander Kenworthy asked whether the Minister would not delay further expenditure on these ships until we knew where we stood as regards the future. Mr. Bridgeman replied: “I think it would be premature to take any steps yet. lam opposed to taking action prematurely, as it would disturb work in the dockyards.” AMERICAN PROPOSALS TO BE DISCUSSED (United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) Australian Press Assn.—United Service. London, May 1. Mr. Bridgeman said that premature action on Britain’s part would not improve the chai cei of an agreement. Commander Kenworthy: “Does the Government propose to recommence conversations with America and Japan?” Mr. G. Locker-Lampson (Foreign Under-Secretary) : “We have studied Mr. Gibson’s suggestions at Geneva, and when we receive the proposals we shall discuss them in the manner offering the best prospect of success.”

REPORTS DENIED REDUCTION PROPOSAL NOT SCRAPPED Australian Press Association. (Rec. May 2, 8.30 p.m.) Washington, May 2. Reports from Geneva that informal exchanges relative to naval disarmament are in progress here between Colonel .Stimson, the Secretary of State, and Sir Esme Howard, the British Ambassador, are denied. To-day the State Department, concerning another aspect of the situation, denied' Press reports “that the Preparatory Commission has scrapped the conception of reduction of armaments in favour of limitation only.” Colonel Stimson, commenting on the declaration of the British Labour Party that “drastic reduction in armaments was long overdue,” said this sounded like the language used by the American representative at the Preparatory Commission, and was not disagreeable to the United States.