BRITAIN WANTS REDUCTION IN CRUISER TOTAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18208, 15 July 1927, Page 5

BRITAIN WANTS REDUCTION IN CRUISER TOTAL.

MR. BRIDGEMAN GIVES LENGTHY ADDRESS. I By Telegraph.—Pres* Assn.—Copyright. [ A.P.A. and Sydney " Sun ” Cables. \ (Received Julv 15, 11.45 a.m.) LONDON, July 14. .At the plenary session of the Geneva Naval Conference, Mr W. C. Bridgeman said that he thought that the atmosphere of the conference had been vitiated by gross misrepresentation in the Press and elsewhere of the British case, and the dissemination of the idea that serious feeling existed among [ the various delegates. Mr Bridgetnan declared that the. delegates had never lost respect for one another, and none saw reason for despairing of finding a solution. A valuable measure of agreement had been reached regarding destroyers and submarines. . It was well worth while to make this agreement, even if the agree- j ment on cruisers was not reached. He ! emphasised that Britain, bv the ac- j ceptance at Washington of the 10.000- ! ton limit for cruisers, found herself j launched on a programme of building j powerful and expensive vessels, the ' end of which was invisible, since the i number of such vessels which each j country might maintain was unlimited. Britain proposed definite maximums j for individual ships in each category. ; both in tonnage and armament. There was no other way of preventing competition in building, except by agreement on the maximum size of each type, otherwise a country might build large ships which, if numerous, would be aggressive in character and so compel the others to do the same. Mr Bridgeman said: “If we cannot agree on the lowest maximum sizes in the British scheme, the only agreement we can reach will be one which will not decrease, but might increase the existing offensive strength. We have not attempted to lay down the requirements of other countries, but wc have made it clear that numbers are more important to us than size. “We offered to agree that the Washington ratio for capital ships should be applied to eight-inch cruisers. We deI sire to limit smaller cruisers to six- | inch guns, so that they will be defensive, not offensive, weapons.

“We were alarmed when America suggested that she possibly would require twenty-five 10,000-ton cruisers J with eight-inch guns. We desire to fix | the lowest tonnage compatible with security; but as numbers, not size, are important to us, the more large cruisers other countries require, the more difficult it will be for us to reach the low total tonnage. If we agreed to these large cruisers with a superiority of at least two and a half to one over the six-inchers, we would accept, not parity, but definite inferiority in offensive power. “The American proposal admits the possibility of a huge increase in offensive strength which would be a strange outcome of a limitation conference. We have gone further than anyone in a plain statement of our needs and reasons. Therefore, I hope that next session will find a solution.” Mr Gibson opened the proceedings of the plenary session by proposing a vote of condolence with the Irish Free State in connection with the assassination of Mr O'Higgins, which Mr Bridgeman and Mr Saito supported. Mr White (Irish Free State) eloquently replied. Mr Gibson explained that the reason for holding the session was to report progress to date as to the shape of the agreements concerning destroyers, submarines and small surface auxiliaries. He admitted that there were still serious problems ahead concernnig cruis-

Mr Bridgeman, Lord Jellicoe, Baron Ishii and Mr Gibson addressed the Conference with carefully prepared expositions of the British, Japanese and American viewpoints. Lord Jellicoe carried the delegates back to the black war years, lengthily reviewing the difficulties of chasing German raiders. Baron Ishii reiterated Japan’s consis- 1 tent unwavering demand for the greatest possible reduction of auxiliaries, even involving considerable Anglo* Japanese non-replacements. Mr Saito expressed the opinion thlat one of the best ways of limiting armaments would be by agreeing on drastic reduction in the number of ten thousand ton cruisers. Thus, there would be ten or less each for the United States and Britain and seven or less for Japan. Further, means would be provided for each nation to retain vessels in excess of the allotted tonnage or past the replacement age on certain (conditions in order to enable the naj tion to possess additional ships for J special purposes. I Mr Gibson associated American? with Mr Bridgeman and Baron Ishii in earnestly hoping that an acceptable agreement would be reached. “We feci now there is no real obstacle to reaching early agreement among three Powers with respect to limitation of destroyers and submarines. We feel that in such close agreement with the Japanese delegation with respect to the total tonnage limitation and type of cruiser that we can easily find a basis of common agreement with them. If a basis tan be found which would be ! mutually acceptable to Japanese and British delegations. I feel sure it will be possible for the American delegation to reach agreement with; them.”