NO BIG SHIPS.

Taranaki Daily News, 17 January 1921, Page 5

NO BIG SHIPS.

NEW NAVAL POLICY. JffiCISION OF IMPERIAL COUNCIL. A SIOMENTOUS MOVE. .?y Telegraph.—Press Assn .—Copyright Received Jan. 18, 5.5 p.m. London, Jan. 15. The Daily Chronicle states that the sub-committee of the Council of Imperial Defence has come to a momentous decision against the continuation of the big-ship policy, on the ground that it involves the country in naval expenditure which is crushing, and which will make the effort to reduce the war debt impossible. This enormous expense not only applies to battleships, but to docks and aircraft and flotillas of cruiser; and destroyers necessary to protect big vessels. The Chronicle adds that a decision along these lines may cost the Fleet the services of Admiral Beatty, but if he agrees the sub-committee and Admiral Beatty will earn the gratitude ’ of their countrymen.—Aus. andi N.Z Cable Assn. During a discussion in the House of; Commons in December on a motion to , restrict expenditure the question of na- j val expenditure came up. In the course! of his reply the Chancellor (Mr Austen ■ Chamberlain), referring to naval con-i struction, said there would be no pro- J of new construction until the I lessons of the war had been definitely' ascertained. Thd Committee of Imperial; Defence was proceeding immediately Ao make an exhaustive investigation, and no programme of capital ships would be presented until this committee reported. NAVAL HOLIDAY QUESTION. SUPPORTED BY AUSTRALIAN. DESIRABLE BUT DIFFICULT. Received Jan. 16, 5.5 p.m. New York, Jan. 15. The New York World, which is conducting a disarmament campaign, secured an exclusive statement in London from Senator E. D. Millen, who represented Australia at the recent meeting of the League of Nations. Senator Millen said it would be a sorry commentary on the heroic efforts of the nations which fought in the war if we emerged from the horrors of a prolonged struggle only to again shackle ourselves to the intolerable burden of huge and costly armaments. A naval holiday or a diminution of armaments was an eminently desirable thing. Continued high expenditure on a new race for naval supremacy would be deplorable, not only because of the crushing financial burden, but also because it would breed distrust and irritation. How an understanding was to reached, however, was by no means so easy of solution. Probably the most useful course now would be to create a healthy public sentiment favorable to such an understanding, and this, sooner or later, would lead those in executive authority to find means for producing the necessary proposals. —Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.

AMERICA AND ENGLAND. ARE NEGOTIATIONS PENDING? Received Jan. 16, 5.5 p.m. New York, Jan. 15. Sir Auckland Geddes (British Ambassador to the United States) has sailed for England to confer with Mr. Lloyd George and the Foreign Office. The British EmJbassy in Washington withheld the announcement of his intending departure until the vessel had sailed. • There is much speculation regarding the object of the visit. It is suggested in some circles that he is going to discuss disarmament. He returns in February.—Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn. CONFERENCE PROPOSED. Received Jan. 16, 5.5 p.m. Washington, Jan. 15. The House Foreign Affairs Committee unanimously approved of a resolin tion requesting the President to call an international disarmament conference.— Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.