The New York herald., 1921-12-23
Continued from Preceding Page.

vfded that the other Powers would dc
the same thing. That was the Brius..
offer to the world and he believed that
IL was a greater contribution to the
cause of humanity than even the limita-
ton of capital ships.
However, il was useless to be blind TO
the facts of the position and ne hardly
hoped to carry with him all the Powers
present at that table, though he believed
/ that in the end all civilized Powers
would come round to the British point &c
view.
In any event the British Empire dele
cation did not intend that the settle
ment in regard to capital ships shou..
be effected II they failed to carry their
point in regard to the abolition Of sub
pharines. Should he fail to convince his
colleagues he ould nevertheless welcome
any suggestion for the reduction and re-
striction of submarines which they might
like to make. and in particular he would
await with the greatest interest the pro-
posals of his French collea CUES which
had been promised earlier in the day.
Shows Where u. s. Is I'm Lead.
Upon the conclusion of Lord Lees re-
marks the chairman said that he did not
intend then to comment upon the very
able and powerful argument OF Lord Lee
to which the members Of the committee
had had the privilege of listening, but he
merely wished to interpolate a statement
giving the figures supplied by the Amer
lean naval experts and upon which the
American proposal was based, concern
Ing the submarine tonnage built and
building, since these figures did not ap-
pear to coincide with those referred to
by Lord Lee.
United States. $4,000 tons; Great Bri-
tain. S2,464 tons France. 42,S50 tons
Italy, 2O,22S tons, and Japan. $1,000
tons.
The United States has. therefore, s5.-
600 tons. which it is prepared to reduce.
The reduction is slight, but II is a re-
duction. II was, Of course, not the In
tention to increase. but to reduce.
Mr.. Sarraut, in paying tribute to the
able statement Of Lord Lee, Joined with
the other delegations in expressing his
profound disapproval of the barbarous
use which was made OF submarines in
the late war
The French delegation recalled the
fact that the question of the use Of SUBJ
marines had already been dealt with
during the discussions at the peace con-
ference. as we'll as by the League of
Nations. and that public opinion had
shown itself favorable to the continu-
ance of submarines.
Call 1t Defensive Weapon.
The French delegation believed that
the submarine was prominently a de-
fensive weapon, especially for nations
scantily supplied with capital ships.
In its present state the submarine
had proved itself to be unequal to gain
Ing control Of the seas. and could not
be considered as dominating weapon.
Moreover. it was urdeniable that the
submarine could be used under honor
able conditions; and it was certain that
these conditions should be examined,
discussed and formulated in such way
as to determine the laws Of sea war
fare In conformity with the lessons
and precepts drawn from the late war
In view Of these facts the French
delegation therefore felt called upon to
give its approval to the use Of the sub
marine under the restrictions already
outlined. 1t wished to point out that
in view of the technical considerations
governing tho use at sea OF these ves-
sells. subject az they are to frequent
withdrawal from service, it would be
necessary for a navy to possess q num-
Der Of them which would be proper
tionate to the needs of national defence.
The French delegation wished, more
over. to observe that the use OF large
submarines was. under existing condi-
tions. undoubtedly more in accordance
with the laws of humanity, which de-
mand that the crews of torpedoed yes
sells should be rescued. Finally. sub
marines with a large cruising radius
are. in the opinion Of the French dele
cation. necessary to assure the defense
of distant colonies and possessions, as
we'll as to maintain the safety Of lines
OF communication between the mother
country and the possessions or colonies
for which she is responsible.
Italians Also Disagree.
Mr.. Schanzer said: I'VE have been
listening with the greatest attention and
sympathy to Lord Lees important
speech. In the name of the Italian dele
cation I wish to declare with the great
est sympathy upon anything that can
make war less inhuman. The Italian
delegate in the subcommittee for poison
gas In this same conference proposed
the abolition Of these gases.
Nevertheless, the submarine question
is. mainly one OF technical nature. Lord
Lee has asserted that submarines are not
efficient means of defense Our naval ex-
perts do not share this opinion. They
think that the submarine Is still an in
dispensable weapon for the defense of
the Italian coasts. which have a very
great extension and along which some
of our main centers, our principal rail-
ways and number OF our most impor-
tant industrial establishments are sit-
uated Our naval experts are further
more of the opinion that subma rines are
necessary to protect the lines Of COM
munication OF our country. which for
the greater part depends upon the sea
for It's supplies. We are not ready to-
day TO resolve these doubts OF technical
character.
I'VE venture to observe, moreover,
that we do not think this conference, in
which only five Powers are represented.
could resolve the question OF submarines,
which can concern many other Powers
which are not present here. For these
reasons and in spite of our appreciation
of the humanitarian arguments brought
forward by Lord Lee, we are not to-day
In measure to associate ourselves with
the propose! of abolishing submarines.
and we are not authorized to do so.''
Japan Also Dissents.
Mr.. Harihara said that Japan was un-
conditionally opposed to all abusive uses
OF submarines, such as those recently
committed by certain nation however,
Japan felt that legitimate use of SUBJ
marines was justifable. as well as neces-
sary from the point of view of defense.