Mar. 20.
Though extensive reports of the doings of the Naval Conference have come out by telegraph since we last referred to this subject on February 11, it does not appear that more has been done than to arrive at a certain amount of agreement in connection with the possible limitation of battleships and submarines, After the Conference had been in session some thing like six. weeks, it we found that Great Britain and America were in favour of a total suppression of submarines as againat the adv of re tention by the Japa an French, The Italians were in favour of abolition, providing all the other Powers did the like. The matter was discussed in committee at very considerable length, and we find that by March 6 the Powers were willing to accept limitation of the size of underwater craft, though there was, here again, some divergence of views which will ultimately have to be reconcile ed. Thus, while Britain, Amer-fea, and Italy were willing to accept a maximum displacement for submarines of 1,800 tons, France would only agree to a general maximum of 2,000 ton: with a certain number of yesso running up to 3,000, From this, in the absence of further infor-motion, it would seem that the movement to dispense with the submarine entirely has. faile: out that some progress may eventually be made towards a limitation in size to be established between the two extreme figures given above.
When we come to a consideration of what has taken place with regard to capital ships, the first impression to be gathered from a reading of the statements arious Powers is that re-will be a matter of very considerable difficulty. The chief obstacle in the way of agreement is undoubtedly what each particular Power considers to be its proemment needs, and though Great Britain and America seem to be within measureable distance of a final understanding, with possibly the accession of Japan, the difference of opinion existing between France and Italy may very well lead to a substantial reduction of the results eventually to be obtained. The French attitude was admirably summed up by M. Andre Tardieu on February 14, He claimed that on the basis of global tonnage France had reduced her fleet from 1 339,000 tons before the War to present figure of 682,000. But! while there has been this.reduction of 551,000 tons over the whole ficer, aeroplane carriers and submarines have been increased by 32,000 and 62,000 tons respectively. There was in this same statement a notable passage which may be taken te refer to the German pocket-cruiser, the Ersatz Preussen, though it is not entirely impossible that he also had in mind, as it was subsequently shown that the Americans had, the existence of the British battleship Rodney. Tardieu said: "France is now obliged, owing to the recent appearance' of a new type of battleship, to make use of part of the credit of 70,000 tons before the end of 1936, and she might be compelled to use completely during the same period should new ships of the same type happen to be built."
The Japanese in their statoment apparently considered the American fleet the standard by which to measure Japan's requirements, and the actual figures put forward were tons America: Large cruisers 180,000 Small cruisers 147,000} Destroyers 150,000, "nes 81,000 Japan: Large cruisers 126,000]
Small cruisers 81,700]
Destroyers 105,000 Submarines 77,900
The alternative proposal was follows: tons America: Large cruisers 160,000 Small cruisers 1 Destroyers 1
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.