WHICH METHOD?

Southland Times, Issue 21000, 5 February 1930, Page 5

WHICH METHOD?

NAVAL LIMITATION THE COMPROMISE PROPOSALS CATEGORIES OR TOTAL TONNAGE tVnited Press Assn.—By Telegraph—Copyright.) Rugby, February 3. After a week-end spent in freedom from negotiation, the delegations to the Naval Conference were again in contact to-day, the main problem under consideration at the moment being the compromise between the method of naval limitation by the categories of ships or by the total tonnage. Broadly stated, the suggestion is that in certain cases the fixed amount of tonnage of vessel may be transferred from one category to another. The categories affected by this idea, the amounts considered transferrable and the constitution governing such arrangement involve numerous and complicated considerations which it is understood will be discussed further at to-morrow’s meeting of the first committee which embraces all the delegates to the conference. So far provisional progress has been made with the proposal, but the attitude of the delegations requires to be defined upon it before any decision can be reached and the expressions of opinion are expected to take more definite form in committee.

At the first committee meeting to-mor-row M. Leygues, Minister of Marine, will be the chief French delegate present. The main business of the meeting will be the discussion of the compromise proposals regarding the two methods of naval limitation, namely, by the categories of ships or by total tonnage. In this connection the British delegation have now formulated a set of compromise proposals which were circulated to the other delegations this afternoon, and will be considered at to-morrow’s meeting. These can be regarded as the British contributions to the discussions inaugurated last week by Mr Masigli, the French expert. They follow largely the old British proposals and categories suggested in them, namely, capital ships, aircraft carriers, cruisers subdivided into two classes, cruisers with 8-inch guns, and those with guns of 6-inch and lower calibre, destroyers and submarines. Regarding small cruisers and destroyers, it is understood the proposals leave the way open for- an arrangement whereby a complete transfer to 100 per cent, might be made between cruisers of 6-inch gun and less calibre and the destroyer class; this elasticity being designed to enable certain countries to fulfil the special requirements in these classes of ships. It is believed that the compromise will be found to form a satisfactory basts for further discussion, and that the conference will be able soon to devote itself to other problems. This evening the Prime Minister and ■ the Foreign Secretary met Mr 11. L. Stimson and other American delegates in the Prime Minister’s room at the House of Commons.—British Official 'Wireless. A STIFF PROBLEM THE ELASTIC TONNAGE. London, February 3. There are indications that the week’s conference discussions of an elastic tonnage will produce the hardest nut of the whole agenda. In the French suggestion there would be one scale for Britain, America and Japan and another for France and Italy. It is safe to say the former Powers will oppose the application of the French idea' to transfer battleships and eight inch cruisers Which would mean giving France and Italy freedom to interchange the whole range of ships. The major Powers are intent on confining the elasticity to the six inch cruisers downwards, covering both commerce protection cruisers and submarines, to which the French mind is apparently strongly wedded. Behind the idea of a separate Continental scale is the right to transfer 20 per cent., while Britain, America and Japan would be limited to 10 per cent. Such wider elasticity naturally raises, the point that France and Italy, by building large cruisers, could upset the balance of the British, American and Japanese reckonings. Similarly it might embarrass Britain, whose commerce protection needs to extend beyond the mere Mediterranean and African interests. France so far has not discussed the nature of her claims in regard to submarines and it is felt this problem must arise immediately because the .quotas cannot be tabled until it is seen what strength in submarines she and Japan desire. The preparatory meeting of the first committee in connection with naval disarmament conference will be held to-morrow morning. Mr Stimson will see Mr MacDonald this afternoon. No great progress is expected as the result of this meeting. As M. Tardieu and M. Briand are still in Paris no fresh proposals have been circulated to bring to an elucidation the necessary French and British formula. SUBMARINE FLEETS EFFECT OF WASHINGTON TREATY. (Rec. 9.5 p.m.) London, February 4. The Daily Telegraph’s naval correspondent states in anticipation of France’s insistence upon a fleet of submarines com'prisiqg 126,000 tons there is a strong probability that the American delegates will raise the question of the so called “Root Resolutions,” Which form the appendix of the Washington naval treaty in which are incorporated seven articles, four relating to submarines anfl another to the use of poisonous gas. In view of France’s gigantic submarine programme, the questions which will be put to France in regard to her intentions towards the “Root resolutions” might be embarrassing.