Naval Conference

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVII, Issue 179, 14 July 1927, Page 6

Naval Conference

Hopes of a Settlement. EXPERTS EXAMINE NEW OFFERS PROGRESS REPOR?Ep Geneva, July 12. Experts spent the day examining new offers and did not hesitate tonight to intimate that they had progressed sufficiently to report real progress to the heads of the delegations. There are lively hopes that within a few days a useful settlement may be announced. American and Japanese quarters are inclined to view Mr. Bridgeman as over optimistic in the opinion that the conference will be ready for a plenary session within a couple of days. Mr Bridgeman hinted yesterday that the tripartite character of the conference was the stumbling block. Several times on smaller matters a two-Power agreement was reached, only to fail because of the non-acq.uiescence of the third party. It is understood something of this nature occurred in reference to cruisers. American circles admit that Britain and the United States wore almost within sight of an agreement upon the tota] cruiser tonnage, but Japan was not inclined to accept the Anglo-American figure, still preferring a lower total for cruisers and destroyers, which may be submitted on Friday.

It is reported that the basis of the prospective Anglo-American accord is the limitation of both navies to twelve large cruisers of the Australia and Canberra type, accounting for a total tonnage of 120.00(1, with a maximum of 330,000 devoted to smaller cruisers, probably helow 7500 tons each, as advocated in Britain's original scheme.—(A. and N.Z.) ATTITUDE OF JAPAN. MAXIMUM LIMITATION. New York, July 12. The ‘‘New York Times’ ” Washington correspondent states: “With the positions of Britain and the United States on the cruiser issue at Geneva far from reconciled, the attitude of Japan has assumed major importance under circumstances tnar may exercise a final influence upon the success or failure of the limitation effort. It ha s become known that the Japanese delegation is ready to return to Tokio without any agreement rather than see an arrangement that would require a large naval construction expenditure on her part and that Japan’s position is practically rigid for a maximum limitation of 450,000 tons fop cruisers and destroyers combined for the United States and Britain.

“Mr. Kellogg has made it clear that the United States does not care to accept Britain’s latest cruiser suggested. He has also challenged the contention that would be economy in lengthening the life of battleships or reducing their size until a further conference in 1931. Mr. Kellogg, furthermore, does not favour a limit of teri to thirteen cruisers of the 10,000-ton class. Sir Austen Chamberlain’s statement concerning Anglo-American friendship has been cordially received here and forms the basis of strong hopes that the conference will accomplish its purposes.”—(A. and N.Z.) BRITAIN’S NEW PROPOSAL. SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. London, July 11, The Australian and New Zealand Press Association’s correspondent at Geneva says the Hon. W. E. Bridgeman stated that exchanges of views on the new British basis led him to believe the postponed plenary sitting might be held on Wednesday or Thursday. Ihe thesis had not been previously fully considered owing to the American suggestion that she wanted to be free to build 25 Washington type cruisers. It was the latter suggestion that almost caused a deadlock.

Mr. Bridgeman said : “ I do not believe it is generally understood that 10,000 ton ships armed with eight-inch guns are two and a-half times more powerful than any cruiser afloat armed with six-inch guns. The American proposition would result in the so-called disarmament conference increasing the aggressive power of the navies. The American proposition that we should first bind ourselves to a total tonnage, leaving the United States to fill the class with whatever size cruiser she cares for, seems to be like asking Britain to close her eyes, open her mouth and take whatever America likes to give. Our new proposal is simple and straightfowrard. Each party is to agree not to build more than a fixed number of the various types of cruisers within a given period of years. The United States would be able to build up to our strength in the largest type of cruisers, using the remainder of her tonnage for whatever other types may be desired. We simply want to know what the other Powers are planning in order to cut our cloth accordingly. Britain is prepared to accept a total aggregate of 400,000 tons for cruisers and destroyers, provided the number of cruisers of 10,000 tons is fixed for all three Powers. Mr. Bridgeman’s statement was made to the British press exclusively as a protest against misrepresentation of the British case in a section of the American press.