LONDON NAVAL TREATY.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18614, 9 July 1930, Page 9

LONDON NAVAL TREATY.

Opposition In America. PRESIDENT HOOVER’S APPEAL. United Preps Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received July 8, 7 p.m.) WASHINGTON. July 7. Obtaining a quorum for a special treaty session, President Hoover delivered a message, stating: “I should present my views thereupon. That this Is necessary is due to misinformation and misrepresentation which has been opposed to all reduction. The only alternative to this Treaty is competitive building, with all its flow of hate, suspicion, ill will and ultimate disaster. History supports those who hold to the agreement as the path to peace. It is folly to think that because we are the richest nation, we can outbuild others. The very entry of the United States on such courses, would invite the consolidation of the rest of the world against us. To those who seek earnestly and properly for a reduction of warships I would point out that as compared with 1/1 this year, the total aggregate Navies of the three Powers this Treaty will have been reduced by nearly 300,000 tons. Had a settlement been made at Geneva in 1927, upon the only proposal then possible, the fleets of the three Powers would have been approximately 680,000 tons greater than under the Treaty now being considered.” INTEREST IN BRITAIN. PRIME MINISTER QUESTIONED. British Official Wireless RUGBY, July 7. In the House of Commons to-day, various questions regarding the Naval Treaty were addressed to the Prime Minister. He said at the time when the preliminary negotiations took place in August and September last with the ! United States, the question of cruiser | replacement was considered by the Admiralty, and the figure of 91,000 tons was put forward for the new tonnage to be completed by the end of 1936. This figure was employed in the ensuing conversations, which had for their object the removal of the earlier difficulties in regard to cruiser limitations. These preliminary conversations were for the purpose only of clearing the ground prior to the London Conference. The figure of 91,000 tons was finally fixed during the Conference, when, after negotiations with the j United States and Japan, it was found that it met the British replacement re- j quirements within the terms of the | Treaty. The Prime Minister added that the ! forthcoming Imperial Conference | might well afford a convenient oppor- j tunity for discussing the naval build- I ing programme in the light of the Lon- ; don Naval Treaty. The definite ques- j tion of discussing limitations of the tonnage which the Treaty imposed, j could be raised by any Dominion that | so desired. NEW ZEALAND’S POSITION. QUESTION IN HOUSE OF COMMONS. United Presß Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, July 7. In the House of Commons, Colonel C. - Crookshank inquired into the reasons ►f the Government’s refusal to receive Jew Zealand’s nominated representaive at the Naval Conference. Mr Macdonald: There never was nor :ould be any question of the Governnent declining to receive the representative nominated by New Zealand. Colonel Crookshank: Do you mean o say the statements made in the louse of Lords are quite incorrect? Mr Macdonald: No. Colonel Crookshank: Then what do fou mean? No reply.