Washington Cinference.

Hokitika Guardian, 24 December 1921, Page 3

Washington Cinference.

(From the Special Representative of the Australian Press Association.) AUXILIARIES AND SUBMARINES. A COMPARATIVE STATEMENT. WASHINGTON, Dec. 22. it is believed that the French intend asking for 300,000 tons of “auxiliary” craft and 00,000 tons of submarines. The opinion is growing that the capital ship ratio will not necessarily he carried through in the classification of all craft. In this connexion it is interesting to compare the latest available tonnage in these types for all five Powers. Britain and France have no submarines building, hut have built 82,404 tons and -12.949 tons respectively. The United States has 82,015 tons built and building, Japan lias 31,4512 tons, and Italy 20,250 tons. In “auxiliary” surface combatant craft Imilt and building the tonnage figures are : Britain 010,810 United States 574,510 Japan 189,959 France 207,099 Italy 151,500 Many of the shins of the French and Italian navies arc worthless Irom a fighting point of view. It is a question whether the Conference will take them into consideration as Icing necessary to scrap in order to bring I'ranee and Italy within tho suggested ratio. If no;, France will have already nearly all the tonnage she is reported to he asking for. Similat!.,'. regarding submarines, the Coiilo’cnce may allow her to rest on her present figures. It may be said that these figures come from latest American calculations upon which Mr Hughes founded his proposals. THE NAVAL ASPECT. WASHINGTON. Dee. 23. All attention to-day was focussed on the meeting of tho full committee on naval matters. Admiral Bon first presented the ease for the French, urging the need for a greatly increased ton--111,.,,, of auxiliary craft and .submarines. Ho" will' be asked to give adequate reasons for bis assertions and possibly to lay n complete statement before the Committee. It is thought this is improbable at this stage. If time permits, Britain will present the ease for the abolition of submarines, basing reasons on her war experience and pointing out as one of the. chief arguments that the submarine had not proved a,n efficient weapon of defence, except in the early period of the war. j after which warships were able to combat tho arm succcsfully. whereupon the Germans used it. against defenceless j mere hnntmen. Similar tactics might be exported o'" any nation driven to des j Iteration. It was impossible to control | tho use of submarines by the ordinary

iex of warfare. J It was evident the British are hopeless i of carrying their point completely at j 1 his conference, though their action will have a powerful effect on public opinion. raid sway the inundations for a reversal of the decision at some further J •iTerence, but the attitude may have , tlie effect of inducing m curtailment of j image below Mr H ughes’ original pro- ! postil. It is hinted that Mr Hughes lias already opened this aspect of the case with M. Briand, directly after the receipt of M. Briu-nd’s first letter. Italy has definitely ranged himself against the British on the matter of abolition, though willing to take as low at tonnage as possible, so long as it is equal to France, and also to confine the functions of submarines to purely defensive purposes. Italy argues that surface craft can act as brutally as submarines, It will depend on the character of the commander and the orders received. RULES OF WARFARE. WASHINGTON, Dec 22. It is now known that efforts. were j made at this Conference to form a committee to revise all, the rules of war- : fare. a,s well as submarines conduct, | but was abandoned, because all tho na- i turns of tho world were not represented j here. | It is stated that American experts re- j ported against the abolition of gits as a I weapon, nn the ground that it is just as humane as shells. The rules of war- ; fare are being considered to-day by the j sub-committee.. Rules may eventually* lie laid down at a full conference of all Rowers for naval warfare, including i barring of merchantmen arming, even ’ for defence. I FRENCH DELEGATION. j WASHINGTON, Dec. 22. ! It is stated that anv difficulty ill understanding French tactics may lie \ due to the personal feelings of M. De 1 Ron and M. Sarraut, who are known to lie "sore” because Mr Hughes had taken the matter of disarmament over :! ."!r heads, direct to M. Ilriand. On the other hand, it may mean that they are anxious to have Biilain defeated by the other nations in the matter of the abolition of the submarines, with Franco leading in that defeat. Then, it is suggested, they may imagine that they will be in a position to dictate their own terms to th* conference. * It is evident that they still misunderstand the temper of other delegates, which is crystallising strongly as against the French altitude. The French delegation has made a retraction of M. Briand’s offer to withdraw Fiance’s battleship demand. One effect of this will he the further lengthening of the Gotileionce, as the French delegation now shows no signs of any attempt at a fresh compromise. CON F E HENCE I>R OI ’OS F.D. 'Received This Day tit 9.40 a.m.i WASHINGTON. Dec. 22. Senator France introduced a. resolution in the Senate which would authorise Mr Harding to call an International Economic Conference to discuss the settlement of war debts and reparations, next month . .SUBMARINKS QUF.STION. 'Received This Day at 9.40 a.in.) WASHINGTON, Dee. 22. The afternoon session of the full Committee was devoted entirely to a • discussion on the abolition of submarines. Mr Lee opened the British case with a speech described by the American * spokesman as a masterly, powerful, comprehensive statement .rcHpewing ' the question from every aspect. Tt is understood lie will further develop arguments at the plenary sitting when i it is' held. Sarraut (France), Sehanzer (Italy), - and Tfattiliara (Japan) opposed the abolition while expressing tho detestation of the savage methods of using sub-