PROPOSED SUBMARINE BAN

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 111, 8 February 1928, Page 9

PROPOSED SUBMARINE BAN

BRITAIN WOULD RENOUNCE HER BIG FLEET PROVIDED ALL COUNTRIES FOLLOWED EXAMPLE POSITION OF FRANCE AND JAPAN By Telegraph—Press Association.—Copyright. (Rec. February 7, 8.55 p.m.) London, February 6. Opinion in well-informed circles obtained by the “Daily Telegraph” emphasises the point that Britain, despite her possession of an efficient fleet of submarines, second to none and forming an important link in Imperial defence, would gladly renounce them, provided all countries followed her example. But if a single Power stands out the scheme must collapse. The case of France is instanced, with 91 submarines in the current programme, France basing her main system of defence upon these craft. It is difficult to convince France that France and Japan should give them up. The prevalent idea is that had America supported Britain at the Washington Conference, British and American combined influence might have succeeded in securing universal abandonment.

UNITED STATES OFFER REITERATED BY MR. KELLOGG “BARBAROUS” METHOD OF WARFARE r Ottawa, February 6. ■ Mr. Kellogg, in an interview, reiterated the United States.offer to negotiate treaties to outlaw the submarine, which he described as a "barbarous” method of warfare. He declared that the United States would offer such treaties as fast as arbitration treaties, now effective, expired. Mr. Kellogg declined to discuss the United States naval programme, but expressed surprise at the hostile attitude of France towards his submarine suggestion. He said: ‘No discourtesy was intended by my letter to which France takes exception, and in which I announced that the United States was willing to sign a treaty abolishing submarines, if other world Powers would take that step.” PARIS PAPER’S VIEW

AMERICAN IMPERIALISTS’ DREAM Paris, February 6. “Mr. Kellogg is wasting his time,” bays the, “Quotidien,” “in pointing out that the submarine is the only weapon with which countries with small navies can defend themselves against Dreadnoughts and cruisers. If Mr. Kellogg’s proposal is accepted, he will gain a signal triumph, clearing away the last obstacle to the tyranny of the seas dreamed of by American Imperialists.” —A.P.A. and “Sun.” UNITED STATES NAVAL PROGRAMME • UNCERTAINTY AS TO COST (Rec. February 7, 8.55 p.m.) Washington, February 6. The hearings have been practically completed before the House of Representatives’ Naval Committee, and uncertainty concerning the exact cost of the programmes is .visualised in a statement by Representative Vonson, who said he'reckoned the naval appropriations for the next eight vears would total 1,15'2,000,000 dollars, and Representative Britten said the total would be 3,000,000,000. The Assistant-Secretary, of the Navy, Mr. T. D. Robinson, therefore has been asked to prepare a chart showing complete details and the cost of all the vessels proposed. I , Commander Burney informally told members of the committee that English statesmen did not consider the American programme in the light Of competitive building. TO BUILD SHIPS \ PURPOSE OF ; NAVAL COMMITTEE Washington, February 6. Commander C. Burney, M.P., who is< visiting Washington in connection with an Atlantic airship service, attended a session of the House of Representatives’ Naval Committee. The chairman, Representative Butler, said: "I hope he will learn that the purpose of the committee is to build ships.” AUSTRALIAN SUBMARINES OFFICIAL INSPECTION TAKES STRANGE TURN (Rec. February 7, 8.55 p.m.) London, February 6. Comment has. been occasioned by the Australian Navy for the first time in history becoming a party to what is generally described as a newspaper advertising “stunt.” The official inspection bv Sir Granville Ryne of the submarines Os,ley and Otway at Portsmouth, arranged for to-day, was con-

verted to a semi-private publicity parade, at which two silk ensigns, not provided through the usual channels, were presented to the ships. Thus what should have been a distinctive Commonwealth ceremony became a distinctly strange event, humorously reminiscent of “H.M.S. Pinafore.” FRANCO-AMERICAN TREATY OF ARBITRATION Washington, February 6. The French Ambassador and tlie Under-Secretary of State, Mr. R. E. Olds, signed the new Franco-American arbitration treaty to-day. The two Governments pledge themselves to arbitrate any dispute not arising out of purely domestic questions and not affecting interests of a third nation and not involving the Monroe doctrine.—A.P.A. and “Sun.” COMMEMORATION IN PARIS (Rec. February 7, 8.55 p.m.) London, February 6. The “Morning Post’s” Paris correspondent says that many columns of newsprint are devoted to commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the Franco-American Treaty, and the signature of the new Arbitration Treaty. M. Briand entertained the American Ambassador, Mr. M. T. Herrick, and the Franco-American Society gave a large banquet in the evening. As though not desiring to spoil the occasion, the Press almost entirely ignores Mr. Kellogg’s submarine suggestion. No official proposal on the subject has been received yet. France will undoubtedly reply that she is willing to destroy her submarines if the United States destroys her ■ dreadnoughts. Mr; Kellogg’s proposition, following on the heels of the new capital ship programme, appears to France to be merelv a poor election dodge. Even M. Litvinoff’s sweeping disarmament proposition at Geneva is regarded as. preferable to Mr.. Kellogg’s. M. Litvinoff at any rate suggested an allround reduction, not a scheme hitting some navies severely and not touching others. MULTILATERAL ANTI-WAR TREATY WASHINGTON’S ATTITUDE (Rec. February 7, 8.20 p.m.) Washington, February 6. It is intimated in responsible quarters that the United States refuses to believe that Negotiations for a multilateral anti-war treaty have reached an impasse as a result of M. Briand’s insistence upon the inclusion only of wars of aggression. The hope here is that France may recede from this attitude. UNITED STATES AND WORLD COURT QUESTION REVIVED Washington, February 6. A resolution suggesting that the President reopen negotiation for United States membership of the World Court was introduced by Senator Gillett and laid on the table’ for future consideration. The Senator stated that he believed that President Coolidge favoured further negotiations.