Washington Conference.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 December 1921, Page 2

Washington Conference.

I (From the Special Representative of the I Australian Press Association.) PRAISE FOR NAVAL AGREEMENT Washington, December 1 Mr Balfour has issued a statement to the press, praising the naval settlement, which, he says, is undoubtedly a great scheme, and is going to benefit all the countries in the world, especially those with the greatest fleets. He does not believe, however that the defensive power of Britain, or the United States, or Japan will be lessened, whereas the naval burden will be greatly diminished He says the agreement has one great merit of leaving all the Powers safe from attack, while preventing nutthroat competition in armaments, and doing absolutely nothing which any patriot need regret if he considers the safety and security and honour of his country.

Mr Balfour remarks that the cost of war is rapidly mounting. Even the richest nations had to think of the pressure of taxation. Looking at the matter purely from an economic standpoint, it seemed to him that there would bo an enormous benefit and advantage to mankind, one that it would be most difficult to estimate. The agreement opened quite a new chapter. "jlr Balfour states the American Government has started this great example by a sacrifice of its own armaments. This had never been dene before. On tho first day of the Confer ence, Mr Hughes had begun a new page whereon were written in unmistakeable charcters the gospel of sacrifice. All would be required to give up some ships, while diminishing the size of the new ones. This was going to

be a landmark, because it began by tile announcing of a sacrifice on the part of the nation inaugurating the conference.

The agreement’s effects on Britain would be to diminsh the public burdens and relieve the economic strain. The agreement would be a lesson to humanity, and an example for the tutor reformers without in the elast harming the ’ security or honour of their country. . Mr Balfour, reiterated the British views respecting submarines. He proposed to take every legitimate opportunity of laying those views before the conference. The world did not consider submarines were necessarily a defensive weapon alone. They might however, he said always become an offensive weapon, if they sank peaceful merchantmen at sight, whether neutral or belligerents. The question of time for presenting the case rested with tho United States. He thought it would be dealt with as a five-Power proposition, and would await an agreement with France and Italy.

JAPANESE PEERS MORE. NEW YORK, Dec. 17.

The ‘‘Chicago Tribune’s” Tokio correspondent states: “A new group is being formed in the Japanese House of Peers, their purpose being the wrecking of the present Ministry. It is felt that the Washington Conference’s decision to permit Japan to retain the dreadnough Mutsu, now building, makes M. Takaliasmi’s defeat iu the Lower House impossible. The Peers’ group is almost strong enought to defeat the Budget. It is determined to drive out the Cabinet and to form a more aggressive one.

The feeling is that Japan has suffered too much of a loss of prestige. The Peers’ action, however, cannot affect the Washington agreements as the Privy Council has assured its support.