Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1921-12-23
BRITISH PLEA
TO Ban subs
NOT FAVORED
U. S., France, Italy and
Japan Insist Oh Sub
mersibles
RESTRICTIVE RULES
Discussion of Four-Power Treaty
COntinues-Presiden May be Will
ing to Support Reservations

Washington, Dec. 23.-Thc United
States stands pat on the necessity
Of the submarine as a weapon OF de-
Tense, and so do France, Italy and
Japan.
Lord Lee. spreading for the Brit
ish delegation before the Naval
Armament Committee of the Arms
Conference yesterday. made an earn
est plea for the abolition of the un-
derwater craft. but without any more
success than had been anticipated.
The other nations, through their rep
resentatives, expressed their detesta-
tion of the illegal Us Of such craft,
and agreed that the rule of visit and
search in the case of merchantmen,
with protection to the lives Of their
crews, should be rigidly enforced.
The French claims. which it had
been thought might be presented to
the committee, went over for lack OF
time.
Meanwhile, the other phases of the
Arms Conference were at a stand
still.
The Shantung dispute between the
Chinese and Japanese delegations
marks time pending the receipt Of in
structions from Toxic as to terms Of
purchase of the railroad. The Japan
esc, however, let it be known that
they will oppose opening the ques-
ton of the 2l demands of 1915 be-
fore the Conference.
Washington, Dec. 23.-Thc British
through Lord Lee. entered yesterday
their Indictment Of the submarine and
it was an impressive as the forecasts
have Indicated but it failed to shake
either the American. French. Italian
or Japanese. Discussion will be re-
sumed today. The British argument
in brief was this:
"In the World War, when Germany
had 315 submarines, of 100000 aggre-
gate tonnage, she was unable to sink
any modern British warship or to kill
one of l5,000,00G soldiers moved back
and forth across the Channel, except
those in unprotected hospital ships.
Hence the submarine is inefficient
either TO prevent operations of fleet
or to prevent landing Of an army,
and thereby is proved inefficient for
purposes Of defense. As it is inefficient
in defense against warships it must
be inefficient in attack upon them.
That leaves, as the function Of the
submarine. attack on merchantmen,
such as that made by Germany in
the late war. in violation of laws of
war and at the cost Of thousands of
lives and millions of dollars of prop
erty.
Having only the function. the Brit
ish hold the case for total abolition To
be invulnerablc and one which soon
or later will convince all nations.
The reply of the spokcsmcn for
the other powers was simple. They
applaudcd Lord Lee upon making a
powerful argument and then contend
ed that their naval experts did not
agree with the conclusions Of Lord
Lees British experts that the sub
marine IS not an effective weapon Of
defense. NJ. Sarraut, for France; Sem
ator Schanzer, for Italy. and Mr.. Han
lhara. for Japan. spoke along that
line.
Mr.. Hughes. for the United States,
did not express his own opinion on
abolition, but he read the report Of
the American advisory committee,
which, broadly speaking. was in ac-
cord with the French, Italian and Jap
ancse views. He added that the crux
Of the question is as to the use of
the submarine for defense.
The one point Of agreement be-
tween the British and the others, as
stated by Mr.. Hughes, was that the
use made Of submarine by Germany
cannot be used thus again. If used
against merchant vessels, it must be
after visit and search. protection of
crew and passengers, and in general
accord with ell-establishcd interna-
tional laws.