EFFECT ON INDUSTRY.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 November 1921, Page 5

EFFECT ON INDUSTRY.

LARGE FIRMS WILL SUFFER. VIEWS OF ADMIRALS. PROPOSALS NEED DISCUSSION. Received Nov. 14, 5.5 p.m. London, Nov. 14. It has been pointed out to the Australian Press that the Washington proposals would have a far-reaching effect on great industrial firms. Twelve such in Great Britain have an authorised capital of £48,000,000, and employ normally nearly 100,000 people, many of whom would have to seek employment in other industries. The Daily Chronicle interviewed several experts regarding President Harding’s proposals. Admiral Sir Percy Scott says the principal matter in question is whether or not we shall build more warships. Owing to the changed conditions of naval and aerial warfare the building of battleships is an insane policy. Vice-Admiral Mark Kerr considers the proposal that the capital tonnage be used as the measurement of the relative strengths of America, Japan and Britain affords a good, sound basis for discussion. He agrees with . the suggested abandonment of all the capital ships on the building programmes. Admiral Sir Cyprian Bridge says America’s proposals do not seem to take note of the connections of the British Empire. Insufficient allowance has been made for the naval interests of India and Australia, with their enormous coast lines and maritime trade. Australia is very near ten millions of Asiatics, and the proposal is not acceptable without a good deal of discussion.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn. MR. MASSEY’S VIEWS. PEACE FOR A TIME. SECURITY OF THE PACIFIC. Wellington, Nov. 14. Interviewed regarding the Disarmament Conference proposals, the Prime Minister said: “I think the conference has commenced very satisfactorily, though in addition to the suggestions which have been put forward there will be many very important details to be considered. What is proposed does not mean the end of war really, but a ten years’ naval holiday, especially so far as capital ships are concerned. There are so far no proposals mentioned with regard to light cruisers, submarines or destroyers,' or airships, but the proposals mean, as I understand them, peace for the present, especially peace for the Pacific. It will probably be recollected that when I was speaking to the House of Representatives a few weeks ago I expressed the opinion that if we are to have continuous peace or peace for a lengthened period it could only come about by a friendly arrangement between the three great naval Powers of the world— Britain, America and Japan. I expressed the same opinion at the Imperial Conference. I hold that view now. The world needs peace, and in consequence the conference has my very best wishes for a satisfactory solution of the difficulties with which we are confronted, but it ought to be remembered that Britain was the first to give the lead in disarmament, scores of British ships having been scrapped and the personnel of the Navy having been reduced since the armistice by about twothirds. I would just like to say this, however—and it is only by way of reminder—that whatever is agreed to must, in order to be satisfactory to British citizens, be consistent with the safety and honor of the Empire.” WORLD’S NAVIES. THE THREE BIG POWERS. FORCES COMPARED. An official statement laid before the Naval Affairs Committee of the American House of Representatives early this year gave the following particulars of the tonnage and numbers of vessels of each type then existing in the three navies: GREAT BRITAIN

While these figures hold good Britain has a very considerable superiority, but this advantage, of course, is vanishing as America and Japan proceed with their construction programmes. The writer of an article published some time ago in the London Morning Post supplied the following tables, which show how completely the position as between Britain and the United States would be changed, if present programmes were adhered to, by 1924: UNITED STATES FLEET (1924). Battleships (post-Jutland design: 14inch guns and above) 12 Battleships (pre-Jut land design) 9 Battle-cruisers (post-Jutland design: 14-inch guns and above) 6 Battle-cruisers (pre-Jutland design: 14-inch guns and above) nil Total ... 27 BRITISH FLEET (1924). Battleships (post-Jutland design: 14inch guns and above) nil Battleships (pre-Jutland design: 14inch guns and above) 18 Battle-cruisers (post-Jutland design: 14-inch guns and above) 1 Battle-cruisers (pre-Jutland design: ’ 14-inch guns and above) ........ 3 Total 22 On this basis, as the writer in question pointed out, America in 1924 would have eigbte«u post-Jutland cauital shjjs, wdde

Britain’s only post-Jutland capital ship would be the battlercruiser Hood. The American proposal is that the three navies should be reduced, as regards capital ships, the fqllowing strength: Tons Ships Britain 604,450 22 United States 500,650 18 Japan 299,700 10 MR. C. E. HUGHES. A NOTABLE CAREER. The man who everyone is talking about is Mr. Charles E. Hughes, who introduced the disarmament proposals He is head of the United States delegation, and is Secretary of State—a position corresponding to that of Minister of Foreign Affairs in European countries. Mr. Hughes is expected to be the dominant figure of the conference. In his earlier career, writes an American correspondent, Mr. Hughes was marked by what would be called in Great Britain a Nonconformist conscience. His political enemies used to refer to him irreverently as “the Baptist Pope.” This quality has been tempered by his later years to a state in which the conscience is still there, *ut in its practical applications is mollified by a generous and charming His first appearance as a public character was in the role of relentless exposer and prosecutor of improper practices in- the conduct of some of the semi-public institutions of the United States, especially some of the great insurance companies.

Mr. Hughes had executive experience as Governor of New York State. then became one of the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court. From this position he was drafted, in 1916, by the Republican Party, to run as their candidate for the Presidency against Mr. Wilson. After his defeat he resumed his private practice of law, and for four years was, without any question, the leader of the American Bar. When Mr. Wilson and his Cabinet went out of power, and in the debacle of Mr. Wilson’s effort to take the United States into the League of Nations, Mr. Hughes was chosen by the new President to take up the extremely tangled skein of America’s foreign relations. The position was one of enormous difficulty, and Americans almost universally think that Mr. Hughes has handled this trying situation ad-

Tons Ships Battleships . 635,650 26 Destroyers . 356,418 334 Light cruisers ... . 189,295 44 Battle cruisers .... . 175.400 6 Submarines ., 85,505 98 Aircraft carriers . . 67,200 4 Destroyers’ leaders . 41,774 24 Cruisers 37,200 2 — —- Totals . 1,588,442 538 THE UNITED STATES. Tons Ships Battleships . 435,750 16 Destroyers . 308,260 260 Light cruisers .... . nil nil Bar tie cruisers .... . nil nil Submafmes 35,361 54 — —— Totals . 779,371 330 JAPAN Tons Ships Battleships . 173,320 6 Destroyers 26,926 27 Light cruisers ..... 25,350 6 Battle cruisers . . . .. e 110,000 4 .. — Totals . 340,596 43