NAVAL POLICY.

Taranaki Daily News, 3 February 1922, Page 5

NAVAL POLICY.

FRANCE AND SUBMARINES. M. JUSSERAND’S DEFENCE. BRITAIN’S VIEWPOINT. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Washington, Feb. 1. Official.—After Mr. Hughes had announced the agreement on the Naval Treaty to members of the Naval Committee, M. Jusserand addressed the members. He said his country in the past few weeks had been severely criticised, and serious misunderstanding persisted. “Many people continue to believe that although we are poor we want to establish a big navy of big warships. Nothing of the kind. We were only thinking of the future when it might be necessary, and when we might be less poor in order to assume on the high seas the rank which we ever held.” M. Jusserand continued: “Of the countries which we expected to approve this ambition our great maritime neighbor was in our opinion the foremost, since there are so many chances that our fleet may prove of use to Great Britain and pone, I trust, that it should be harmful to her. There have been three great wars in the last century in which the British and French fleets participated side by side for the same cause. Can anything different be imagined? We of France, even, if our English friends adopted a different opinion, would not change ours. People continued to be persuaded that we have a passion for the loathed submarines, and want to use them in German fashion. All this is chiefly grounded on remarks made by the chief Lord of the Admiralty on December 30, based on an article by M. Castel. The tone of that article is paradoxical. M. Castel did not mean what the British assumed he meant.

M. Jusserand then quoted a statement by J. Hall, English lecturer on international law, who declared, that the complete prohibition of the submarine was not acceptable. M. Jusserand added that when M. Castel said the submarine made it possible to overthrow British naval power he was merely indicating how the Germans reasoned, and not the point of view of the French.

M. Jusserand quoted excerpts from an Eastern article showing that M. Castel was explaining the German attitude, and condemned their barbarous use of the submarines, and continued: “My heart bleeds when I recall the statement that M. Castel would pour the submarine infamy into the ears of the French naval officers whom he was teaching. This is impossible, because M. Castel does not believe" this, and the subject of his lessons is the organisation of the general staff. I regret that the British did not know the opinions of Captain Laurent, who teaches naval strategy, and who condemns the German use of submarines.”

M. Jusserand concluded by correcting Mr. Balfour’s statement that France only had 257 submarine destroyers, while England had 3676, and was using them to France’s immense advantage. He said France had more than thirteen hundred. LORD LEE’S REPLY. Lord Lee, replying, said he was not aware that M. Jusserand was going to raise this matter, and therefore he was not in a position to give an answer in detail, which would have been possible if he had had the relevant papers with him. He

thought it unnecessary to make a detailed reply to M. Jusserand’s criticisms, which he took in good part. Lord Lee said he was surprised' at M. Jusserand’s wholehearted and vehement defence of the Eastern article, the general tenor of which was ridicule of the objections to those methods of submarine warfare. Lord Lee added that he could not withdraw the observation of the general feeling of condemnation and horror which anyone reading the article as a whole must have for the views M. Castel championed. Lord Lee said he believed M. Castel was a whole-hearted supporter of the necessity of the German system of unlimited submarine warfare. He pointed out M. Cartel’s official position, and the character of the publication in which the article was printed made it natural to suppose his ideas were being taught to the French naval men; but he would be glad to know that contrary ideas were being taught, especially in view of the French Government’s political and professional repudiation of M. Castel’s views. No one had attempted to belittle France’s part in the war. She did her utmost; but Britain practically had the whole problem of defending France and Britain from submarines, and Britain might not be in a position to do it again. Therefore he urged, in the interests of both countries the suppression of submarines. The British delegation had that object. As a matter of fact, France desired treble her existing fleet of submarines, and Britain had offered to guarantee France’s coasts from aggression.

Lord Lee concluded with an earnest expression of the continuance and augmentation of the French and English friendship. M. Jusserand arose and echoed the sentiment.