NAVAL HOLIDAY.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 January 1922, Page 5

NAVAL HOLIDAY.

MAY BE EXTENDED. FEATURES OF THE TREATY. IMPORTANT ADDITIONS. ARMED AUXILIARY CRAFT. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received Jan. 10, 7.35 p.m.

Washington, Jan. 9. There is a possibility of the final draft of the naval treaty providing for a naval holiday for fifteen years instead of ten years, as at first arranged. This is possibly an effort to meet France’s demands that she should be

allowed to commence building before the expiration of ten years. The Conference is likely to meet the question of arming merchantmen by limiting the calibre of guns and forbidding the subsidising of companies to build stronger vessels capable of carrying heavy armament. It is understood that the Nine Power Agreement has already been drafted,

embodying the Root resolutions, and guaranteeing the integrity of China and Siberia. It may also supersede the Franco-Japanese Alliance of 1907.

The naval treaty consists of twentyfive articles and three thousand words. Besides providing the naval ratio, total tonnage aircraft and various other matters already cabled, as agreed upon, it will stipulate that aircraft carriers shall only be allowed to carry ten eight-inch guns. It does not limit stxinch or smaller guns to auxiliary craft,

which are restricted to ten thousand tons each.

It definitely provides that a scrapped ship shall not be reconverted into a warship, and merchant ships are not to be built so as to be capable of conversion for war purposes, inasmuch as they are not to be strengthened to carry more than six-inch guns. The contracting Powers agree not to build warships for non-contracting Powers greater than they themselves are allowed, and they will notify , other contracting Powers of any such building, giving all possible particulars. Two provisions deal with the subject

of further conferences, and the question of action if a contracting Power is attacked. The first provides that if during the term of the treaty the requirements of any contracting Power in respect to its naval matters be materially affected by any change of circumstances a conference may amend or revise the treaty. The other provision enacts that if any contracting Power be engaged in hostilities involving naval operations it may give notice of the suspension of its obligations to the remaining Powers, who may consent to a temporary modification.

The treaty is expected to last till 1937, but there will be a naval holiday for ten years only, re-building starting by all Powers in 1931. In addition France and Italy shall each be allowed to build one ship in 1927 and 1929, and also re-condition their present capital

ships, which will be allowed to carry sixteen-inch guns. The scrapping can be done by sinking, breaking up, converting to commercial or harbor use, or auxiliary purposes, making targets, or for sea-going gunnery practice.—Special to Australian Press Assn.

FORTIFICATIONS IN PACIFIC. RULES GOVERNING AIRCRAFT. LIMITATION IMPOSSIBLE. Received .Jan. 10, 8.25 p.m. Washington, Jan. 9. Other provisions in the naval treaty, in addition to those already cabled, ccncern questions of fortifications m the Pacific, on which there is -likely to be some discussion. Other points are still in process of being drafted, but those cabled are unlikely to cause much discussion, having already been generally accepted, though it is understood the French, may want restriction placed on the number of ships which the contracting parties may build for other nations. The proposition is evidently aimed at Britain.

The committee on the limitation of armaments discussed the report of the sub-committee on aircraft. After several delegates had expressed a hope that a future conference would be enabled to again consider the question more successfully, a resolution was passed that the committee is of opinion that at present it is impracticable to impose any effective limitations on the number and characteristics of aircraft, either commercial or military. Regarding the sub-committee’s recommendations for rules governing aircraft in war, M. Schanzer thought the Conference should solemnly proclaim again the Hague rules against the bombardment of open towns. Senator Root pointed out that these did not take air attack into consideration.

Further discussion ensued as to the •reference of the whole subject to a commission of jurists and the scope of their inquiry—whether they should consider all the rules of war, or only those connected with new agencies of warfare. The matter was finally referred to the drafting committee, with instructions to bring down a suitable resolution after considering all the suggestions made.— Special to Australian Press Assn.