NAVAL PARITY

Hawera Star, Volume XLIX, 16 August 1929, Page 9

NAVAL PARITY

ANGLO-AMERICAN RELATIONS. MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL IN CANADA. EX-GH A X CEL LOR HI SLIK ES RIGID AGREEMENT. (United Press Association— -Br Electric 1 hegraph Copyright.; (Austiuliaii Press Association.; OTTAWA, Aug. 15. Addressing the Canadian Club today. Mr Winston ChurehM dlecliaued that it had been the aim of every Britiwli Government to remove ail stumbling blocks from the path of AngloAmerican friendship, and success bail crowned their efforts. The only live issue remaining was the question ol the naval agreement. He declared the 1921 Washington agreement conference. wa.s a- great decision, which ho had look on ’with faith and hope. He added: ‘’.But on looking back, I began to wonder if it did not. do as much harm as good to Anglo-American relations.” Pointing out that the Washington Treaty dealt only with the battle fleet, the speaker said that the new agreement would be moire a complicated "affair. Ships varied as much from one another as human beings.. '‘lt seems to me w? are opening up fields of infinite technical discussion with immense possibilities of inliisrunderstnndino - if we try to regulate the whole of the minor construction of the two countries in accordance with isome rigid treaty instrument.” While Britain wa.s dependent for food and raw material on her sea-borne trade, the United States wa.s a selfcontained continent, separated l>y thousands of miles from any potential danger, while Britain was _ only one hour away from Europe, with itg. animosities and quarrels. . He. stated that there can be no parity of circumstances. . “To apply rigid numerical equality to conditions" so markedly unequal, whatever the Yardstick may be, there runs a o-rcat risk of not ‘arriving at the true. goal, which is that the United States and the British empire shall be equal powers upon, the seas.” he. said. •'“I wonder if this great, diversity of conditions is understood by.the. American people and whether it will receive fair recognition in the proposals they have to make us? If not, then a fair agreement will be. hard to reach, and, if reached on paper without the real assent of public opinion by each country, then in the years to come they may again raise up those difficulties which it is our object to sweep away. 1 doubt if a rigid agreement will lead to. effective reduction of expenditures.”