NAVAL TREATY

Greymouth Evening Star, 29 September 1928, Page 7

NAVAL TREATY

U.S.A.’s REJECTION

COMPROMISE PROSPECTS (Australian Press Association.) (By Cable—Press Assn.—Copyright.) PARIS, Sept. 28. According to hints from the Quai D’Orsay (French Foreign Office) , where the American Note will be delivered on Saturday, Mr. Coolidge added a conciliatory touch when completing tlie final draft. It is understood that. Mr. Coolidge intimated America does not agree with the French viewpoint. A Quai D’Orsay spokesman said: If that is so the Franco-British agreement ends, but we hope to find an acceptable basis of negotiation, after Japan and Italy reply. The suggestion is thrown out that it is better to send a commission of naval experts to Washington than negotiate through embassies. “Le Petit Parisien” understands that the United States’ note regrets it cannot endorse Franco-British naval compromise as it does not meet the American needs. The note emphasises that the Navy Department cannot agree to the limitation of large cruisers being offset by a corresponding limitation of light cruisers, submarines and auxiliary craft. The Note makes no concrete suggestions, but leaves the door open to further conversations for a reduction. ITALIAN MISGIVINGS ROME, Sept. 28. “Giornale d’ltalia” which o’ften reveals the official view, asserts that Italy shares America’s misgivings, flnd the two may unite at Geneva and elsewhere to protect their respective interests, and international place. WHAT U.S.A. PROPOSES. (Received September 29, 11.30 a.m.) WASHINGTON, September 28. The text of the Note, replying to the Franco —British Naval proposals, is published to-day. It vigorously rejects the proposals, and reveals that the United States limitation thesis is unchanged, since Geneva. It declares .that the proposals are even more objectionable than those offered at Geneva, and concludes that the United States remains willing to use her best efforts to obtain a basis for further haval limitations, satisfactory to all the Naval Powers, including those not represented at the Geneva Triparte Conference, and was willing to consider French, Italian or other special needs for a particular class of vessels, but the United States expects others to accord similar consideration to American needs. It suggests that such consideration could be achieved by permitting any Power to vary the percentage of tonnage, provided the proportion of such variation is agreed upon. Thus, if one class of vessel; were 'increased, it should be deducted from the tonnage allotted to the other classes.

The Note says: “The Government of the United States feels no useful purpose would be served by accepting, as a basis of discussions, the Franco-Bri-tish proposal.”