LIMITING NAVAL’ ARMAMENTS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 17 March 1927, Page 9

LIMITING NAVAL’ ARMAMENTS.

Conference Convened by U.S.A. OBJECTIVE OFFICIALLY EXPLAINED. By Cable—Press Association —Copyrifkt* Australian ami N.Z, Cable Association. (Received March 16, 9.40 p.m.) WASHINGTON, March 16. The State Department has published the text of the Memorandum delivered to the Italian and French Foreign Ministers on March 14, answering their replies on the disarmament

proposal. The Department says, regarding the fear expressed by the French Government, that such negotiations risk compromising the success of the work of tho Preparatory Commission at Geneva. The United States expressed the opinion that all appropriate measures taken by large naval Powers cannot but contribute towards facilitating the work of the Commission. The Department also expresses the opinion that far from undermining the authority of the League, such conversations would be of great service to that body in advance towards the solution of difficult problems. The Governments of Britain and Japan now accede to, the proposal of the United States, which has therefore decided to enter into conversations with these Polvers. The United States hopes that both Italy and France will he represented, in order to be cognizant with any agreements. The Memorandum points out that’ the United States has no preconceived ideas regarding a definite ratio of limitation of French and Italian tonnage, and says: “We do not desire to open up questions already settled by tho Treaty, but wish to point out that other questions relative to the limitation of naval armaments are open.”

The Memorandum adds that in the projected negotiations, each Powdr would have the privilege of taking any position it thought best for its protection, as a basis for the negotiations. 1

Referring to Italy’s refusal, on the ground of her geographical position, opinion is expressed that an agreement lor partial limitation of armaments could expose no Power to danger from Lie navies of Powers not included in such an understanding, since no agreement is contemplated which would not he subject to reconsideration and revision.

FRENCH PREMIER’S IMPft£SSIONS AT GENEVA. LEAGUE PROGRAMME ' FOLLOWED. By Cable—Press Associalion—Copyright. Australian and. N.Z. Cable Association. (Received March 16, 7.55 p.m.) ■ > PARIS, March 15. Reporting upon the Geneva proceedings to the French Cabinet, M. Briand disclosed that Dr. Stresemann proposed to demand the evacuation of the Rhineland, at the next meeting of the Council of the League of Nations. M. Briand declared, in this connection, that France would uphold her rights and viewpoint, as regards security and reparations. ■. A long discussion followed concerning an “observer.” Opinion ,is hardening that the subject of disarmament should be treated fas a whole. It is pointed out that- the League of Nations’ programme provides for this, whereas, President Coolidge's proposal does not, while a mere “observer” at the Washington Conference, would be at an obvious disadvantage, in defending France’s naval viewpoint.

LEAGUE’S DISPLAY OF FORCE. INTERESTING POINTS RAISED. By Cable —Press Association— Copyright. Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. (Received March 16, 9.30 p.m.) GENEVA, March. 16. An interesting discussion occurred at the Disarmament Committee, regarding naval and aerial demonstrations, which the League Council might order, in the event of threatened war against any State, noU submitting to its recommendation.-. The representatives of Italy, Jj&pan, Germany and Colombia opposed the use of aerial forces. Eventually the Committee adopted a resolution, proposed by Viscount Cecil, to the effect that the Council might order naval and aerial demonstrations within reasonably defined limits. ; PROPOSED CONFERENCE AT GENEVA. DOMINIONS NOT INVITED. By Cable—Press Association—CopyrighW (Received March 16, 5.5 p.m.) , WASHINGTON, March 15. X President Coolidge declares that he does not contemplate inviting Canada and the other British Dominions to proposed Geneva Naval Limitations Conference! He assumes that the proposal, as,'made to Britain, is agreeable to the Dominions, and understands the British Government conferred with them before acceptance. ‘

VIEWS OF FRENCH PRESS. RISKS OF "OBSERVER.” PARIS, March 15. Tho press generally shy at the suggestion that France should have an observer at the naval disarmament conference, contending that tho danger to France’s interests are not removed. “Pertinax” in the “Echo de Paris”', opines that refusal to attend mgde Mr. Coolidge more circumspect. The idea of an observer is not a bad solution, 1 but the observer must speak laconi- ! cally and keep a distance from the net | set to catch him, i