The New York herald., 1921-12-25
Britain Alone Accepts Ameri-
can Plan Cutting Tonnage,
and Negotiations Halt.
NEW ATTEMPT TUESDAY
France Balks at Effort to Ad-
just Relative Strength of
Undersea Craft.

WASHINGTON, Dec. "a ASSOCIATED
Press).-An American effort to COM
promise the submarine controversy
failed Of immediate success to-day be-
fore the arms conference naval COM
mittee when Japan refused to accept
a suggested reduction Of her SUBJ
mersibles to $1,000 tons and French
action was deferred pending advices
from Paris.
When the committee adjourned
after four hours debate to meet again
next Tuesday, some members of the
American group appeared discouraged
over the prospect for any early agree
ment on submarines, although nego-
tiations are to continue.
| The American compromise plan,
presented after the British effort for
complete suppression of submarines
had been shelved. proposed 10000 ton
limitations for Great Britain and the
United States instead Of the original
American figure of 10000 tons each,
and virtually a status quo for the
other three Powers.
The present tonnage for these three
Powers is: France. $4,000; Japan,
$4,000, and Italy, $4,000.
The British delegation, failing to OBJ
tain favorable action on suppression of
submarines. accepted the new American
reduction scheme.
| Frenchmen Defer Answer.
The French group indicated that it
would be unacceptable, but deferred
full answer pending Paris advices
Japan fatty held out for the full $500
tons In submarines under the original
American .five-five-three'' ratio plan
Italy accepted the compromise plan.
conditioned on submarine tonnage
parity with France, the italian delegates
contending that 81 500 tons would be the
correct limitation for both France and
Italy.
The French delegation indicated that
1t would not oppose parity with Italy
III submarines, as well as In capital
ships. but withheld approval of any
tonnage limitation of less than the 5000
ton figure suggested by French experts.
Under status quo France would have
about 1900 tons in submersibles.
The American group made II plain that
while 1t had great sympathy for The
| British viewpoint in opposing all SUBJ
marine warfare, It was inclined to agree
with tho American advisory committee
that submarines were legitimate
weapon.
Harding for wider Basis Later.
1t was said the matter had been dis |
| cussed with President Harding and that |
the willingness OF the American Cow
| ernment to proceed at some future date |
| toward an international discussion of
submarine warfare on a wider bass
than the present conference had been |
| indicated.
| 1t was also indicated that the Ameri- |
can delegation would bring into the |
conference later n resolution condemn |
ing In formal fashion for the five Pow
| ers,such use of submarines as was made |
by Germany during the world war.
Before the British proposal was
shelved. which was done tacitly and |
without comment or formal action, Ar
thur J. Balfour made n final plea for |
| the British case against underwater |
craft. At the same time he placed for
mally on the records of the conference |
| a concise statement of British Views on |
this point and urged that a world con-
ference be called later again TO take I'D |
| the question.
To induce agreement the American |
delegation again offered. as In the capi-
ral snip pTOpOSdi, " lildht lUt greatest
sacrifice in tonnage. American figures |
show a present submarine strength of |
$4,000 tons for the United States and |
$4,000 tons for Great Britain. Under
the compromise plan the United States I
thus would scrap $4,000 tons and the |
British $4,000. The effect Of the Ameri- !
can-British agreement to-day, had IL
been ratified by the other three Powers,
would have been a net reduction of
,oa arIx & N IN h
marine tonnage.
The American compromise plan ap-
peared to have been aimed at meeting
half way the desires OF each Power in
submarine tonnage limitation. II was
an attempt TO solve the controversy that
had arisen In the naval committee with
Great Britain and France I'm direct op-
position and poles apart in their views
as to the Importance OF submarines in
warfare.
The British desire to reduce subma-
rine tonnage woulc have been met in
large degree on the one hand under the
American plan, while on the other the
French desire 70 increase submarine ton
mage and the French submarine ratio as
compared to Great Britain and America
also would have been met In approxi-
mately the same degree
Action of japan In refusing to swerve
from the line of the 5-s-3 ratio
injected a wholly new element into the
controversy and that and ultimate
French decision on the compromise pro-
posal constitute the point OF departure
for the resumption OF negotiations on
Tuesday.
Under the American compromise plan
the submarine ratio would be. In round
figures: Great Britain. s United States.
6 France, 4: Japan, 3. and Italy. 2. The
italian proposal for parity with France
at 1880 tons would change this TO
approximately a 6-63-33 distribution.
while if the Japanese built UP from their
present strength to $4,000 TONS as they
suggest. they would have almost an
equality with the reduced American and
British submarine flotillas. Neither