THORNY PROBLEM

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16377, 27 June 1927, Page 7

THORNY PROBLEM

THE NAVAL CONFERENCE DISPUTE OVER CRUISERS EXPERTS CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS AM KiU'L'A .SERES IN CUE ASK (E’oo. Tel. Copyright —United Press Assn. (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. GENEVA, .June 24. The executive committee of the Naval Disarmament Conterenee met for a lew minutes this morning. Ah'. W. C. Jtmigeman was appointed chairman. Tlie committee invited the naval delegates to study separately the question of the limitation of the cruisers, destroyers and submarines, and an agreement- was reached in favor of the principle of a reduction in the size of the submarines, though the actual size is not yet agreed upon. Admiral Jones (Ii.S.A.) admitted that the ratio of 5-5-3 which the United States was seeking to apply to smaller vessels is not the ratio of those vessels at present in service. While Admiral Jones was not ready to accept the British figures for cruiser strengths he admit led Dial so far as comparatively new cruisers are concerned the British should be niiieli stronger than the American Navy, 'the American fleet- at present included a considerable percentage of small out-of-date cruisers, dating from (he Spanish-American war. Apart from the conference altogei her, therefore, the United States was, faced with heavy replacement. This bears out the British experts’ conclusion that the net- result of the American proposals must he to increase the United States’ cruiser strength as compared with the British strength, though her needs obviously did not equal those of an Empire with over 100,0C0 square miles of ocean to patrol As an American observer here says: “America called the conference primarily for the purpose of describing as disarmament the heavy programme, of building which must he undertaken to replace our worn-out smaller types of warships. IMPORTANT A!EETING No outstanding decision is expected during the week-end, but, in best-in-formed circles, it is admitted that this morning’s meeting of naval experts, including Earl dellicoe and Admiral Jcakes, was the most important yet : held. j “You can take it that the experts are coming down to tin tacks,” said j the British delegate, hinting that Earl : Jellieoe’s attendance at the committee meeting was significant of the nearness I of an agreement regarding submarines, hut that cruisers remain a thorny problem, while to-day, Air. Gibson (U.S.), in an interview with pressmen, frankly indicated that there was no chance of the United States accepting the British proposals to reduce the size and extend the age of battleships, stating that the actual existence of the two 7)5,000 ton battleships, Rodney and Hood, must always be taken into consideration in any discussion on capital ships. “Seeing that Britain was determined to raise the question,” he added, “we do not object to discuss it but, inasmuch as America is opposed in principle to Britain's proposals to reduce the capital ships, discussion on the subject here must necessarily be highly academic. For the present. America seems determined to holt and bar the door against the proposition to which Britain attacligS the greatest value.” 1 Yesterday, in Japanese circles, it was hinted that the Americans were awaiting instructions from Washington on the capital ships question. Mr. Gibson’s announcement suggests that these i have been received, and that there is '• no chance of America accepting a plan j which would save the taxpayers of! three countries more than all the pro-! positions dealing with cruisers, destroy- j ors, and submarines put together. Air. 1 Gibson even hinted that technical de- j velopments between now and 1931 might j even cause America then to propose an I in rease instead of a reduction in the j size of battleships, which is hardly a pleasing proSpect to hint at. During the disarmament conference Air. Gibson recalled that at Washington if required 12 weeks to work out the details of its simple agreement. ; The procedure at Geneva was entirely ■ different. Each country has brought forward proposals based on its own ; peculiar- needs. It would not be surprising, therefore, if it took some time i to reach common ground. They did i not desire to tie unreasonably optimistic, but all three Bowers wanted to reduce armaments and lie was confident that a lot of patience and hard work would ; eventually produce valuable results. : DELEGATES INTERVIEWED j

i Mr. Gibson, questioned whether America was stating exactly what cruisers, destroyers, and submarines she wanted and why, replied: “We feel the ratio reached at Washington was reached after consideration by all five signatory l’owers and that to state now the exact needs in smaller ships would be simply repeating the work done by strategists at Washington.” Mr. Gibson further stated that, provided the ratio of b-6-5 were, accepted, they would be willing to accept tho lowest possible tonnage aceptable to Britain and Japan, Admiral .lories told the questioner flint America was willing that, cruiser guns should ho reduced to 6in., and destroyers to sm. Mr. Bridgeman, addressing the international journalists, emphasised tho point that Britain was not present at Geneva to try to secure some superiority for her own country. “We are here,” lie said, “merely to I ask for what we think necessary for tho defence of the Empire. The* greatest danger before us all present is the race in ship building and the burden thereof is only avoidable by agreeing to limit

the size of the different categories of ships. Unless we agree to limitation we shall be back at the old Dreadnought building competition, except that vie shall be at the bottom instead of the top of the naval scale. As regards the future limitation of size and tiie extension of lhe life of battleships, we feel that an agreement between Britain, America and Japan will make it easier for France and Italy to join later; also that it will do something to facilitate disarmament work at t file League of Nations.'' Sir Janies Barr, tho senior New Zealand delegate, interviewed, said the past week had been devoted to preliminary spade work. He expected next week will be busier, as all the data had been collected and the experts were meeting to-day, Earl Jellicoe, representing New Zealand, to explore the possibilities of agreement regarding submarines, cruisers. and destroyers, probably in that order, working up from the lowest class. There were already signs of success regarding submarines, thanks to Admiral Field’s most useful suggestions yesterday, hut the question of cruisers was more difficult. Doubtless Australians and New Zealanders would watch narrowly the negotiations regarding these craft. On the- whole Sir James Parr thought- progress was being made.

COOLIDGE DISSATISFIED

BRITAIN MUST FALL IN LINE (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association., (Received June 27, 11 a.m.) NEW YORK, June 25. A New York Times’ .message from Rapid City, Foul'll Dakota, says Pro- j sident Coolidgo, who is on vacation 1 there, is understood to ho dissatisfied j with the British attitude at Geneva. He may sent new instructions to Mr. j Gibson. It. is reported that the President j does not wish to take the initiative at; the present time, and feels that Brit-j ain will he inclined by the sentiment; at home to fall in with the American proposals, or at least modify her present attitude. President. Coolidgo said: “I feel, that tin l American proposals arc in full j accord with, forward world sentiment, j

aiul Britain can not, long maintain hor | present position, which, it' persisted in, j will make a world conference ditlieult. AMERICA DETERMINED EQUALITY WITH BRITAIN WASHINGTON, June 25. Any agreement reached at the naval conference at Geneva will be acceptable to the United States only on the basis of nothing less than parity with Britain in every class of vessel. This was stated, with emphasis, by an official of the , State Department, because of the publication abroad of articles signed by “Admiral B,” purporting to be reasons why Britain should return to her onetime supremacy of the sea. It is learned, authoritatively, that the State Department will instruct the American delegation at Geneva to refuse Britain’s request to discuss capital ships. Mr. Gibson communicated the question to Washington at the request of the British delegation. He will be told there is no change in his instruc-. lions to limit the Geneva agenda to an auxiliary ship discussion as provided in. President Coolidge’s conference call. United States administration circles are extremely displeased over unofficial British statements that Britain must

have “considerable naval superiority” and over the tendency of the official British proposals to support such a superiority claim. One high official said: “The United States cannot, and will not accept anything short of parity with Britain in all cijasses of ships.” This flat declaration Hollowed Mr. ?itr>idgeiina.n’s sis Dement that Brilfaiil would accept equality with the United States in IO.CfiO-toii cruisers, but the parity m other types would still be an open question. The officials nevertheless, believe that Britain will eventually accept, t'lie 5-5-3 ratio proposed by the United States. Mr. Kellogg declared that lie had no information supporting the press reports as to Japan’s possible intention to seek a treaty with the United States.. The Japanese Ambassador called on Mr. Kellogg, hat. gave no intimation of this. Neither has such an official intimation been received from Geneva,