NAVAL PARLEY

Manawatu Standard, Volume L, Issue 76, 25 February 1930, Page 7

NAVAL PARLEY

TALK OF COLLAPSE. “TIME AA’ILL SUPPLY ANSWER.” BRITISH SPOKESMAN’S VIEAV. (United Press Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copy right.) Received February 25, 10.5 a.m. LONDON, Feb. 24. The Daily Express, which throughout the naval discussions lias taken a somewhat despairing view of tho outcome to-day, features a story from its conference representative headed “Naval Conference Collapse,” in which it is declared that the conference is closing down until 1935. The correspondent adds that the statement will probably be denied by the British spokesman, but, nevertheless, it is a fact. The conference, he concludes, has failed for the same roason that tho Geneva Conference failed in 1927—insufficient preparation and too many fine phrases. The conference continues to mark time. The only event of importance during the week-end was the announcement of the departure for America on AVednesday of Rear-Admiral Hilary P. Jones, chief naval adviser to the American delegation. The official spokesman declares that the departure is due solely to illness, and that there is no reason why it should have any effect on the conference. STORY DESCRIBED AS ABSURD. UNCERTAIN FATE OF FRENCH MINISTRY. Received February 25, 11.45 a.m. LONDON. Feb. 24. The Americans describe as absurd the suggestion that the Naval Conference will disband at an early date. Tho Japanese say that they are not so pessimistic. This story is probably based on the uncertain fate of tire Chautemps Government. If it is beaten on Thursday, it will mean another annoying delay. It is just a question of how long the other delegates are prepared to remain idle. Replying to a question regarding the accuracy of the report that the conference may early adjourn until 1935, the British spokesman said that time and events would alone supply the answer. He recalled that similar things had been wrongly said regarding tire eventually successful conference at The Hogue. Mr Ramsay MacDonald spent last night at Stanmore as the guest of Air H. L. Stimson. The technicians this morning continued drafting the report on unclassified vessels. Tho report will be presented to the Experts’ Committee to-morrow. TAA'O DINNER PARTIES. (British Official AVireless.) RUGBY, Feb. 24. Mr Arthur Henderson gave a dinner at the Foreign Offiqp this evening in honour of the delegates to the Naval Conference. In addition to .the members of the Government, the leaders of other parties were among the guests. Mrs Henderson at the same time gave a dinner party to the wives and daughters of the delegates to the Naval Conferente at No. 10 Downing Street, which was placed at her disposal by the Prime Minister and Miss MacDonald.

The naval conference held at Geneva in 1927 was between representatives of Great Britain, Japan and the United States. The conference failed to reach an agreement iegarding limitation -of naval strengths ana closed with the recommendation that tho conference fixed for 1931 to consider the revision of the Washington treaty should be commenced at an earlier date. The actual position at the conclusion of the conference was summed up in a public speech by Mr Winston Churchill, on August 6, 1927. Mr Churchill said: — “The fundamental cause that prevented agreement lay in the different views taken of what constitutes naval equality by tho Americans and ourselves. We are in favour, as a broad guiding principle, of naval equality between the two great English-speaking nations, but the Americans hold that equality or, as they call it, parity, must be measured by equal tonnage and should bo expressed in exact mathematical parity. We hold, on the contrary, that the principle cf naval equality must be based not on mere numbers or tonnage, but must take into consideration the quite different conditions of the two communities. We feel that our island Empire is dependent for its inherent and integral existence, and, indeed, for its daily bread, upon our power to keep open the paths across the ocean. . . . We contend that our position is entirely different from that of a vast self-contained community dwelling in a continent and free from European occupations. Therefore, we are' not able now ... to embody . . . any words that would bind us to the principle of mathematical parity in naval strength.”