NAVAL ARMAMENTS

Southland Times, Issue 21001, 6 February 1930, Page 5

NAVAL ARMAMENTS

FRANCE’S PROPOSALS METHODS OF LIMITATION ' DISCUSSED ’(GOOD RESULTS OF CONVERSATIONS Waited Press Assn. —By Telegraph—Copyright.) London, February 4. It is understood the morning discussions of the Naval Conference committee centred round the attempt to appropriate the abstract French proposals to the more concrete British plan for the transfer of the categories. It is suggested that it may be quicker if the two sets of experts produce an agreed formula. It is becoming more evident that the French tactics arc increasingly tending to convert the conference into a continuance of the Geneva Preparatory Commission, but officially it is passing unnoticed because the present negotiations are being conducted in a healthier atmosphere. Nobody seems to care about the method so long as results are achieved.

The French modifications are not serious departures from the plans previously announced. A reference to reservations indicates that Italy is again not ready to commit herself till a stage of greater detail is reached. She is really voicing the case of the smaller Powers. For example, if a Power possessed three 10,000 ton cruisers it would be quite useless to tell it that it was at liberty to transfer 10 per cent, to another category. This is only one illustration of the physical difficulties being encountered, but optimism prevails that all will be overcome.

A communique states that the First Committee met in the morning and in addition to the statements made to the previous meeting it had before it for consideration the French transactional proposal and a series of draft resolutions outlined under the five heads, also the British compromise. The discussion opened on the basis of the French transactional proposal on which the Italian delegate , Signor Sirianni, the Japanese, Messrs Nagai and Takarabe and Messrs Gibson and Alexander gave their viewpoints on the principles therein after which the proposals were discussed clause by clause. COMPARISON OF FLEETS. BRITAIN AND AMERICA. London, February 4. Beyond referring inquirers to the Blue Book published last month, the Admiralty is not disposed to give comparative figures of the British and United States fleets since the British suspensions of building were announced last week. The following table, however, gives the latest comparisons: Battleships—British 16, United States IS; battle cruisers, British 4, United States nil; cruisers (units and tonnage respectively), built by the British 54, 527,131; United States 14, 36,001; at present buildings, British 4, 36,800, United States 18, 180,000; projected, British nil, United States 5, 50,000.

Thus Britain has built in cruisers 231,130 tons in excess of the United States, whilst the latter is building 143,200 in excess of Britain and also 50,000 in excess projected. Thus the cruiser tonnage totals are: Britain (built, building and projected), 363,931; United States, 326,001. The British grand total excludes four Tecent suspensions which the Admiralty states will probably equal 37,000 tons. r The following are built or building: Destroyers, British 152, United States 309; submarines, British 63, United States 127. BRITAIN'S PROPOSALS. CIRCULATED TO DELEGATES. Rugby, February 4. At the First Committee of the Naval Conference, the First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr A. V. Alexander, represented Great Britain and put forward his Government's proposals regarding the compromise plan for co-ordinating the category and global theories for tonnage liipitation. These proposals are framed so as to facilitate discussion and to elicit the views of different delegations. The British suggestions differ in certain respects from the “Transactional proposals” of the French memorandum published last week. The French scheme permitted a limited transference of tonnage through all categories. The British proposals do not permit of transfer in categories of battleships and aircraft-carriers and visualize only a limited transfer of tonnage downwards, from the large cruiser class, that is, those with 8-inch guns and over, in categories of small cruisers, namely, those with guns of 6-inch or smaller calibre and of destroyers. The transfer however, be possible up to 100 per cent. Complete freedom of transfer in these categories would, therefore, allow nations to meet their individual requirements by devoting, if they so desired, the whole of the tonnage allotted to them for light cruisers and destroyers, to the building of light curisers only, or of destroyers only. There is no fnention of transfer to or from the submarine class but, officially, the British delegation still supports the abolition of submarines. They have, in fact, made something of a gesture by cancelling three submarines in this year’s construction programme and have suspended work on others until after the end of the financial year. Incidentally, the case of the submarine is a clear indication of the weakness of the unmitigated global theory, since a ton in submarines and a ton in, say, cruisers', are obviously not interchangeable units. The British proposals were circulated to delegations yesterday to facilitate preliminary examination. Other problems before Conference are now being taken up in private and in informal conversations, this method of exploration having been found of great assistance in preparing the path to more formal discussions. The heads of delegations met later this morning. The meeting of the First Committee of the Conference was still proceeding when the heads of the delegations met at St. James’s Palace to discuss further the procedure of the Conference. A communique states: “There was general agreement that conversations between delegations, which are giving good results in preparing the way for agreements, must continue. The heads of the delegations will meet again to-morrow to continue their discussion in the light of the work of the First Committee. / French Plan. The French say that the British and Americans both favour the French plan of two cruiser categories for eight-inch and six-inch, provided there is a fixed transfer. Britain leans to the six-inch guns, owing to her multiplicity of world-wide bases, whereas the Americans are inclined to eight-inch guns, suited to her few scattered bases, but wants the transfers limited to small cruisers and destroyers. Other sources suggest that Japan will support the British formula if she wishes the submarines to be untouched. The Americans do not conceal the fact that they are insisting on the exclusion of 10,000 tonners from the transfers, but are willing to allow some aircraft carrier tonnage to be allowed small cruisers. The statement that America is willing to scrap three battleships if Britain scraps the “Tiger” and three “Iron Dukes” and Japan two battle cruisers, making the ratios 15-15-8, is dismissed, as mere kite flying. The Americans and Japanese this afternoon renewed the discussions whigh began at Washington regarding Japan’s desire for a 10-10-7 cruiser ratio. The Daily Telegraph believes the conference will shortly ggt down to bedrock

issues. The various Powers are getting ready to table their claims to the tonnage allotments. The Americans are ready when the moment is ripe to submit the cut and dried figures of her requirements in all categories. Japan is awaiting the American statement before following suit. GERMANY’S DEMANDS. (Rec. 7.10 p.m.) Berlin, February 4. German Socialists arc using the Naval Conference as an argument against the increasing number of pocket battleships. The newspaper Vorwaerts declares, that Germany’s naval construction has already afforded French Nationalists with a basis for opposing the British and American desire to disarm. On the contrary German Nationalists are demanding six battleships similar to the Ersatzpreussen in order to protect German coasts against Russia and Poland. The Peace Treaty permits Germany to build six 10,000-ton cruisers. There is no mention of armaments. ENGLAND AND UNITED STATES AGREEMENT ALLEGED. (Rec. 1.20 a.m.) Park, February 5. The Petit Parisien’s special correspondent in London says an agreement was reached last evening between England and the United States regarding capital ships and submarines whereby there will be a naval holiday until 1936, reductions in the cruiser tonnage, a diminution in the size of heavy guns and prolongation of the age limit of battleships. England and the United States agreed not to demand complete suppression of submarines, buf. consider each country have a limited number with a small fixed tonnage. They should also have specified tonnage of each class of eight vessels. BRITAIN AND FRANCE GAP MUST BE BRIDGED. (Rec. 12.50 a.m.) London, February 5. The meeting of the first committee ended in something closely resembling a deadlock according to the Daily Telegraph’s diplomatic correspondent. The French standpoint, as expounded, would make a "fclean sweep of all ratios of relativity and interdependence. Mr Hugh Gibson (America) strove hard to find a bridge between the British and French. All the delegations agreed before the close of the meeting thkt sugh a bridge should, and would be found Platonic expressions however do not alter the facts.