NAVAL CONFERENCE

Hokitika Guardian, 15 July 1927, Page 3

NAVAL CONFERENCE

plenary session opens

BRITISH POSITION’ OUTLINED

(Australii n & X.Z. Cable Association.)

(Received this day at 10.25 a.m.) LONDON, .July If

At the plenary session at Geneva naval ’conference. Mr Bridgeman said lie thought tlie atmosphere of the conference was vitiated by gross misrepresentation in tbe press and elsewhere of the British ease, and dissemination of tbe idea that a serious feeling e.X’sted amongst tbe various delegates. Mr Bridgeman declared the delegates novet lost respect for on another and none saw it reason for despairing of the 11:.-I----ing of a solution. A valuable measure, of agreement bad been readied regarding destroyers and submarines. It was wed worth while to make an agreement even if one on cruisers were not ten cited. He emphasised that Britain by the acceptance of the 10.000-ton limit for cruisers, found herself launched on a. programme of building powerful, expensive vessels, tbe end of which was invisible, since tbe number of such vessels which each country might maintain was unlimited. Britain proposed it definite, maxima for individual ships in each category, both in tonnage and armament. There was no other way of preventing competition in building except by an agreement on the maximum size of each type, otherwise a country might build large ships which, if numerous, would be of an aggressive character, and so compel others to do tbe same. Mr Bridgeman said: “If we cannot agree on the lowest maximum of sizes in the British scheme, the only agreement wo can reach will be one which will not decrease, but might increase the existing strength. We have not attempted to iay down the requirements of other countries but we have made it clear numbers are more important to us than size. We offered to agree that the Washington ratio for capital ships should be applied to eightinch cruisers. AYe desire to limit tbe smaller cruisers to six-inch guns, so that they are defensive, not offensive, weapons. AVo wore alarmed when America suggested that she possibly would require 25 ten thousand ton cruisers with eight inch guns. AAe desire to fix the lowest tonnage compatible with security, but as numbers and not size arc important to us, the more large cruisers other countries require, tbe more difficult it will be for us lo reach a low total tonnage. If we agreed to these large cruisers with a superiority of at least two and a-lialf to one over the six inchers. we woui'd accept not a parity, but a definite inferiority in offensive power. The American proposal admits tbe possibility of a huge increase in the offensive strength, which would be a strange outcome of a limitation conference. AAe have gone further than anyone in a plain statement of our needs and the reason herefore. I hope the next session will find 'a solution.”