LIMITATION OF NAVIES

Taranaki Daily News, 5 February 1930, Page 9

LIMITATION OF NAVIES

CATEGORIES OR THE TOTAL

DISCUSSION OF COMPROMISE BRITAIN MAKES . PROPOSAL British Wireless. Rugby, Feb. 3. After a week-end spent in freedom from negotiation the delegates to the naval conference were again in contact to-day, the main problem under consideration at the moment being a compromise between the method of naval limitation by categories of ships and by total tonnage. Broadly stated, the suggestion is that in certain classes of vessel a fixed amount of tonnage may be transferred from one category to another. The categories affected by this idea, the amounts considered transferable and the constitution governing such an 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 delegates to the conference. So far, promising progress has been made with the proposal, but the attitude of all the delegations requires to be defined upon it before any decision can be reached, and- the expressions of opinion are expected to take a more definite form in committee to-morrow. At the First Committee meeting tomorrow M. Leygues, Minister of Marine, will be the chief French delegate present. The main business of the meeting will fie a discussion of the compromise proposals regarding the two methods of naval limitation, namely, by categories of ships, or by total tonnage. In this connection the British delegation has now formulated a set of compromise proposals which were circulated to other delegations this afternoon, and they will be considered at to-morrow’s meeting. BRITISH CONTRIBUTIONS. These can be regarded as the British contributions to the discussion inaugurated last week by M. Massigli, the French expert. They follow largely the old British proposals and the categories suggested in them; namely, capital ships, aircraft-carriers, cruisers, subdivided into classes —cruisers with three-inch guns and those with guns of six-inch and lower calibre, destroyers and submarines. Regarding small cruisers and destroyers, it is understood the proposals leave a way open for an arrangement whereby a complete transfer to 100 per cent, might between the cruisers of six-inch guns and less calibre and the destroyer class, the elasticity being designed to enable certain countries to fulfil special requirements in those classes of ships. It is believed that a compromise will be found to form a satisfactory basis for further discussion, and that the conference will be able soon to devote itself to other problems. This evening the Prime Minister (Mr. MacDonald) and the Foreign Secretary (Mr. A. Henderson) met Mr. H. L, Stimson and other American delegates in the Prime Minister’s room at the House of Commons. ( There are indications that the week s discussions of elastic tonnage will produce the hardest nut of the whole agenda. On the French suggestion there would bo one scale for Britain, America and Japan, and another for France and Italy. It is safe to say that the former Powers will oppose the application of the French idea to the transfer of 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 confirming elasticity to six-meh 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, Amciica 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 British, American and Japanese reckonings. Similarly, it might embarrass Britain, whose commerce protection needs to extend beyond mere Mediterranean and African interests. Franco so far has not discussed the nature of her claims in regard to submarines. ' It is felt that this problem must arise immediately, because the quotas cannot be tackled until it is seen what strength in submarines she and Japan desire., FRENCH SUBMARINE CLAIMS. EMBARRASSMENT POSSIBLE. Rec. 10.30 phn. London, Feb. 4. The Daily Telegraph’s naval correspondent states that in anticipation of France’s insistence upon a fleet of submarines comprising 120,000 tons there i 9 a strong probability that the American delegates will raise the question of the so-called Root Resolutions, which form an appendix to the Washington naval treaty, where are incorporated seven articles, four relating to submarines and another to the use of poisonous gas. In view of France’s gigantic submarine programme questions which will be put to France in regard to its intentions towards the Root Resolutions might be embarrassing.