THE AMERICAN NAVY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19375, 10 January 1925, Page 9

THE AMERICAN NAVY

QUEOTION OP GUN ELEVATION. COMPARISONS WITH BRITISH SHIPS. Phoi Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. WASHINGTON, Janaary 8. Mr C. K Hughes (Secretary of State* in a letter to the Naval Committee of the House of Representatives, took up the position that the elevation of gone on American battleships ■would not violate the Anns Treaty, although it might unfortanately tend to promote naval competition. He said that, while Great Britain had taken the view that the alterations proposed would bo a violation of the treaty, Japan took the opposite view. Ho ' de--clared that the Navy Department -wanted: the navy to accord with the 5-5-3 ratio. Ms d D. Wilbur (Secretary to the Navy) told the Naval Committee of the House that, as a result of the Admimstration’a economy policy, he could not recommend the gun elevation programme, nor could he endorse the pending 70,000,000 dollar Bill for new construetk>a. —Renter. , ■■ Mr Hughes’s letter was in response to al resolution asking if protests against elevation had been, made by foreign Powers. Mr Hughes said that the British Ambassador in March, 1923, brought up the subject by “earnestly appealing” to tbe_ State Department against any alteration in the present gun elevations, and giving a positive assurance that no such would be made on any British capital ship after its commission. Mr Hughes stated that the British view was that tha proposed alteration constitutes a. major alteration prohibited by the treaty. Mr Hughes agreed with the Japanese opinion that it was a minor alteration, and did violate the treaty, but ho realised that it might tend to revive competition, which, would not he harmonious with the wellestablished position in the United .States- i —Renter. SLOWER THAN BRITISH SHIPS. AMERICAN GUNS OUT-RANGED. ■ WASHINGTON, Janaary 8. (Received January 9, at 10.20 run.) Mr Wilbur said he believed that thjß’ American Navy was equal to Great Britain's in tonnage, but the American capital ships were about two knots slower t h-n Britain’s, and the American, -guntf were out-ranged by Britain’s by. about! 1500 yards. . , / Representative Britten asked lor. the basis of the Department's belief that the United States? capital ships were equal to Britain’s if they were oat-ranged and less speedy. Mr Wilbur replied that the 5-5-3 ratio applied to tonnage. So many factors entered into the fighting ability of the fleets that it was impossible to determine the relative strength of the fleets before they went into action. Ho declined to say whether the American navy, dll factors considered, equalled Britain's, but stated that confidential reports were availahle to the committee. The United States purposely mad© her ships slower, believing that it was advisable to put the weight m the armour and guns.—Reuter- 1