The Daily News. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1921. DISARMAMENT PROBLEMS.

Taranaki Daily News, 26 February 1921, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1921. DISARMAMENT PROBLEMS.

The recent statements made by the new commandant of the New York Navy Yard (Rear-Admiral Huz) concerning the question of disarmament may be regarded as merely the opinions of an enthusiast in battleship 'building, and not as in any way representing United States policy. The idea that if America stopped building -warships it would only be due to the fact that other nations had not the money to build and wanted the United States to quit, is as absurd as the Admiral’s contention that America must have a navy large enough to fight England, and must construct different ships against Japan than those designed to be employed against England. America’s attitude on this armament problem can be far more accurately judged by the pronouncements of the President-elect than by those of an indiscreet naval official. Lord Northeliffe’s friendly .controversy with Mr. Daniels (American Naval Secretary) concerning what possible naval combination the United States can fear, led the New’ York World to start a campaign for international disarmament, and it has published a contribution from Mr. Harding (President Wilson’s successor), in which it is stated: “It has never been my thought that the United States, a nation unwarlike in times of peace, should enter into any race in the matter of naval armaments. My outspoken opinion has been for ft Navy ample to protect our own growing merchant marine and able to assure a dependable defence of our shores. It should never act as a threat to world peace. With the conscience of the world awakened against war, and the growing desire of each nation to do its part, there is a reasonable assuredness that the time is distant when eonsiderMiens

right, rather than of might, will prevail, and when disarmament will not b© a dream, but an actuality.”

These are just the opinions which the coming President might be expected to hold, and are backed up by other prominent leaders of American thought and policy, such as Mr. Hoover, who describes “the continued riot of expenditure on battleships” as “one of the most amazing failures of statesmanship in our times.” When dealing with international problems of disarmament in a speech delivered at a luncheon given by the Empire Parliamentary Association last December, Mr. Lloyd George stressed the point that “no League of .Nations could possibly be regarded as complete until the great Republic was included therein. ’ ’ He added:

“It is of no use, on the one hand, elaborating great projects for an association of nations to establish peace, and, on the other hand, projecting great armies to force other nations into competition in that terrible race for armaments which had more to do with the war than almost any other industrial cause. But before disarmament is possible, all nations must be there (in the League). . . All the nations must march together . . . and come to a common agreement that they will not start again this pernicious and disastrous rivalry in armaments, which will inevitably end in a crash unless it is. arrested.”

The two outstanding points marking the deliberations of the League of Nations consist of unity of purpose and sanity of judgment, and the application of these virtues to the problem of disarmament would speedily effect a satisfactory solution. The preservation of peace depends on some agreement which will remove the competition in armaments and give the tortured world relief. The disarmament campaign is doing much service in enlightening the world concerning the waste of thousands of millions on probably useless battleshi-ps, at a time when every million that can be spared is needed for works of real progress, for scientific research, the cure of cancer, consumption and other terrible scourges which are the deadly enemies of America Britain, Japan, and all other countries. ‘ ‘ Armaments, ’ ’ said Mr. George Barnes, “involve a grievous burden upon an impoverished world, and increase the risk of war. The test of the usefulness of the League of Nations lies in the extent to which it can arrest their growth. ’ ’