ENDS IN FAILURE

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 5 August 1927, Page 5

ENDS IN FAILURE

THE GENEVA CONFERENCE FINAL SESSION OVER. ADJOURNED SINE DIE. rfY CABLE PRESS ASSOCIATION—CORY RIGHT Received 9.40 a.m. to-day. GENEVA, Aug. 4. The plenary session was held this afternoon. After a re-statement of each side of the case, Mr. Gibson (president) announced that they were unable fo agree, and the eonterence broke up A joint statement was issued which mentions all the points upon which an agreement was reached and upon which it” failed. This shows that the three Powers agreed to adjourn the present conference until an opportune time to resume work. In the meantime they will continue the study which was opened in Geneva.

MR. BALDWIN HAS NOTHING TO SAY. Received 10.5 a.m. to-day. OTTAWA, Aug. 4. The Rt. Hon. Stanley Baldwin refused to comment on the breakdown of the Geneva conference. It is understood that he feels he has been out of touch with the situation, and prefers that the statement should emanate from London.

NAVAL HOLIDAY

JAPAN’S PROPOSAL FINALLY

1! EJECTED

EXPERTS RAISE OBJECTIONS

Received 10.5 a.m. to-day

GENEVA. Aug. 4. Japan’s holiday pioposal was finally rejected, experts pointing out that a limitation conference could not accept a plan which mentioned neither tonnage nor gun calibre.

EFFORTS TO AVOID BREAK-UP

GENEVA, Aug. 4

Contrary to an earlier report, the plenary sitting was fixed lor three o’clock this afternoon at the Hotel Eergues The decision was reached at a conference of the “Big Six,” the Rt. Hon. W. C. Bridgeman, Viscount Cecil, Mr. Gibson, Admiral Jones, Viscount Isliii, and Admiral Saito, at a private residence in the fashionable quarter, which broke up at midnight. .Mr. Gib-son, on leaving, said ; “We simply decided on the agenda and pleuged ourselves not to give any further information.” It is still impossible to state if today's meeting will be the last, or ii negotiations will proceed on the basis of the Japanese proposals. It , is asserted in Japanese circles that the meeting will be the last, but this is not confirmed by either the British or American delegations. it is learned that besides the Japanese proposals, the British also forwarded a scheme, though it is feared there is little likelihood of its acceptance.

It is known that the most earnest efforts were made last evening to avoid to-day’s meeting taking the form of a complete break-up. It is also certain that the British strongly opposed the issue of a communique instead of holding the plenary session, as they want to make their attitude most widely known.

TO BUILD A STRONG NAVY

NEXT MOVE OF AMERICANS

WASHINGTON. Aug. 3

Representative Butler, chairman ol the House Naval Committee, states that the disposition of the next Congress, in the event of failure at the Geneva Conference, will be to build a liuvv in accordance wit a America’s needs. “This country will necessarily want a navy as strong as Britain’s. It has the same need, and must take its place alongside that Power. “I cannot help hut- anticipate the failure of the conference at this time, and if failure comes we should build enough -small ships and make our large ships ns effective as agreed to at the Washington Conference. I greatly’ deplore the necessity, but America did not create the position.” Mr. Butler then launched an attack on Britain and asked: “What is the true reason why England is unwilling to accept the existing ratio for small ships which she so quickly accepted for larger ones?” He also asked: “What "character of people does England anticipate will attack her trade lanes?”

COMPLETE COLLAPSE ANTICIPATED.

AMERICAN OPINION RESIGNED. NEW YORK. Aug. 3. On the eve of the plenary session at Geneva it can truly be said that America has resigned itself to a complete collapse of the conference. A forecast of Mr. Gibson’s speech to-morrow indicates that it will he conciliatory in tone, but will nevertheless assert that the United States literally carried out the spirit of the Washington Treaty by great sacrifice, and that the adopting of the same ratio for aux’linry ships would have lessened naviii expenditure for the world Powers and resulted in a better international understanding, looking to a more permanent peace. Comment from public figures- here has continued to show a diehard attitude. and the overwhelming opinion is that Great Britain is to blame for the Geneva failure. It is interesting to note that editorial comment lias very greatly ceased. Even the New York Times, which was conspicuous by its strong

support of the British contentions, will have no leader on the conference in to-morrow’s issue. GENEVA. Aug. 4. Well-informed quarters consider a break-up to-day i.s inevitable. NEGOTIATIONS ON JAPANESE PROPOSALS. (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, Aug. 3. Exchanges of views between the delegates at the Geneva Naval Limit a-, tion” Conference were continued throughout yesterday, and this is regarded as an indication at least of a refusal to take for granted the failure of the conference. Although the negotiations have hitherto failed to compose the major differences, all the delegates are eager to reach some agreement, and yesterday’s discussions are understood to have lieen centred around a proposal evolved by the' Japanese delegation out of the debris of past discussions. It is claimed for the proposal in its new form that it would satisfy America’s demand for parity hv enabling her to build up to Britain’s cruiser strength, that it would preserve the naval status which was the original Japanese elemnnd, and would result in onsiderahle economy. Should such an arrangement result, it would to some extent mitigate the disappointment felt in Britain at the failure of the-conference to realise the broad purpose sought in the original British proposals, which, in fact, had been carefully elaborated, even before President Co'olidge’s invitation to the conference was received. It is a comprehensive scheme dealing with capital ships, cruisers, flotilla leaders, destroyers. and submarines which contemplated an economy estimated at £0P.000,000 in the course of a few years, and made a definite contribution to the' progressive limitation of offensive armaments, on the model ot the Washington Treaty. A provisional agreement regarding submarines, although falling far short of Britain’s proposal, was reached in the earlv stages of the conference. and would at least have put an end to competition in this class- of vessel. The differences on the cruiser question. however, have jeopardised the prospect of the final adoption of these minor provisional agreements.