U.S. NAVAL WRANGLE.

Grey River Argus, 14 January 1928, Page 5

U.S. NAVAL WRANGLE.

WILBUR DISCLAIMS. Competitive Building. •THE LARGEST IN DOLLARS AND CENTS." (An?. and N.Z. Cable Assn). WASHINGTON. .January 12. Mr Wilbur emphatically denied the charges that the naval programme was designed tG compete with Britain. Chariman Butler requested Mr. Wilbur to return, and tell just what the first-class navy was. Butler having criticised the Navy as too large was shocked by Mr. Wilbur’s statement that it was not first-class. Mr. Wilbur stated: "We will allocate the expense 1 o'f fhe programme at jl6B million dollars a year, and must build seventy-one 'new Ships in order fro bring the Navy up to the necessary strength."

Mr. Wilbur’s proposed twenty year building replacement programme, he said would cost 2260 million dollors and at the end of this twenty year programme the Navy should embark on another twenty year programme to keep the Navy up to the required strength, indicating a basic expenditure of 168 million dollors annually for twenty years. He said the expejnditure':- ' fod <the proposed five year programme, in reality would be spread over eight years, as follows: — 55,200,000 in 1929, 110,400.000 in 1930. 141,100,000 in 1931, 141.500,<J00 in 1932, 139 millions in 1933, 93 millions in 1,34, 46,800,000 in 1935 and 10,40.000 in 1936. Representative Vinson, during the hearing before the Naval Affaris’ Committee, pointed cut that the proposed • five year programme is the largest in drllsrs and cents. ever submitted to congress. Mr. Wilbur replied "yes" to repeated questions. Whether he meant that the United States does not hax a first class navy, the Secretary indicated that the unit cost in. his first year estimate, was roughly: for areoplane carriers. nineteen million dollars: light cruisers seventeen million: and destroyers and submarins, five .million each. The Secretary declared emphatically that he ' proposed five year prO'grain mo <*is not for a paper navy’ but 'that! the Nava! pFpafrtment but that the Naval •Department wants ships actually built. Peace Pact Bubble. DIPLOMATS’ DEDUCTIONS. (Receiver January 13, at 10 p.m.) PARIS, January 13. A French communication from Mr. Kellogg, in a reply to Mr. Briand, suggests that the principal powers should participate in preparation of a draft declaration against war. Political circles deduce J’hat the whole negotiations are slipping out of Mr. Briand’s control and French •liplomatic officials will most likely find solace in a Franco-American Arbitration treaty, to which all efforts are now directed.

“The Big Navy Jingo.” BUILDING PROGRAMME BY AMERICAN PRESS. NEW YORK, January 12. The New York Herald’s Washington correspondent says that Mr Kellogg asked France to-day to accept M. Briand’s original proposal for the outlawry of war. with the inclusion of Britain, Germany, Italy and Japan. He explained that France’s aggressive war proposal was extraneous to the present discussion. In a note sent to M. Claudel, the original text of M. Briand’s proposal was made public, and revealed that M. Briand requested a treaty of the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy. Recent despatches from Paris giving the official view of the foreign office expressed displeasure over the fact that the United States wanted to d > this very thing. Mr Kellogg, noting this discrepancy, said, "I earnestly hope this is of no particular significance, and that it may not be taken as an indication that tn Government of France will find itself unable to join with the Government of the United States." With a cartoon showing Uncle Sam ahd John Bull carrying an ov .rgrown individual dangling a sable and beating a drum, entitled, "Big navy jingo," the "New York World" prints a lengthy leader warning the American Government concerning Mr Wilbur’s proposals. The paper says: "It is idle — it is worse than idle—it is profoundly misleading not to recognize fully that this programme challenges in an unmistakable fashion, the ancient prerogatives of British sea power, and to challenge the British command of the seas is to touch the nerve centre of world affairs. This is the most momentous question in the whole realm of statemanship. The problem is fundamentally political, and to leave it to admirals on both sides of the Atlantic can only lead to disaster." - The "New York Times" says: "It | is to be regretted that the United States and Britain could not get together, at Geneva. Competition in cruiser building looms ahead, despite the protestations of Wilbur, but he is right when he says that both President Coolidge and Congress are opposed to competitive building. There is reason to believe that Congress will not I commit the country to an unrestricted, l building programmer 2 -’ . ,