BATTLESHIPS

Grey River Argus, 27 March 1928, Page 5

BATTLESHIPS

BRITISH PROPOSALS Not Well Received (Australian and N.Z. Cable Assn.) (I.eeciicd March 26, al 7 p.m., , LONDON, March Hie Daily Chronicle’s special Geneva correspondent says that Lord C-uchendens naval disarmament ,pnoposals proving for a limit in size, or 36,006 tons, and a gun limitation to 13 inches, have been coldly received by the 4iepreselntativ.es ot ojiheif powers. The Italian delegation when questioned merely shrugged their shoulders. M. Sato (Japan) said, that in regard to capital ships, his Government had not made up their minds, but he doubted if Japan’s views on the different question had changed. M. Clauz said that such proposals were interesting as there was always a chancre t|hat niegotiiaWms might lead to some important result. AMERICANS SEE THE POINT. American circles received the proposals frigidly, ’pointing out that Britain has several new ships, such as the Rodney and the Nelson, which is the largest yet launched. America, they pointed out would b e privileged to build such ships 5n 1929, but Lord Cushenden proposal vfo-ufTd prevent this, and would thus destroy the equality of basis of the Washington agreement. AMERICAN ATTITUDE. ON BRITISH BATTLESHIP PROPOSALS. WASHINGTON. March 26. There will be no official comment on the British proposal for the reduction of the size of battleships until Mr. Gibson, the United State’s Representative at Geneva, furnishes his report. It is stated that this proposal is not a new one, and was made at the Naval Conference at Geneva in June. At that time the American delegates felt that such a form of reduction would weaken the strategic value of a fleet that was handicapped by an absence of bases in a manner that is not felt bv the British.