Belington progressive. [volume] (Belington, W. Va.) 1912-1927, 1921-12-22
DEMANDS
A BIC NAVY
Asks to Be Allowed to Build
Ten Capital Ships.
BRITISH OPPOSE SUBMARINES
French Request, Believed to Be For
Trading" Purposes, Threatens to
Upset Naval Agreement.

Washington. = The announcement
by the British spokesman France
has asked before the naval sub-com-
mittee of fifteen for authority in
agreement with the other four naval
powers to build between 1925 and 1885
ten $4,000 ton capital ships struck
arms conference circles with stunning
force.
Another outstanding feature of the
days developments was the notice
given by Arthur j. Balfour, head of
the British delegation, Great Britain
would propose to the conference the
total abolition of submarines
The French proposal was believed
in some quarters to be trading propo-
sition or to accomplish some other
purpose not clearly discernable except
to the French.
The French PROPOSAL was so wholly
out of accord with theories on which
the naval conferees have proceeded
up to this time there was a strong
inclination in British and American
circles not to take it seriously. The
feeling was said to rest in part on
what Premier BRAND said at the Sec
Ond plenary session in regard to the
American proposals for naval limita-
ton.
Referring to Secretary of State
Hughes bold stroke for an agreement
for naval reductions, NJ. BRAND said:
you have shown us the way; you
have shown us that it is no longer
question of cropping for a way out of
the difficulty; you have struck out
boldly the opportunity for us by set
ting the example. I may say that we
are back of you, Mr.. Secretary
"The question with which we have
first to deal here is, of course, one
that mainly concerns the great naval
powers; but I may say for my part
that I have listened with great joy to
the very large, broad and general adj
hesion given in principle by the gov
ernments of Great Britain and Japan"
Mr.. Briend's reference to "prin-
ciples" was construed at the time as
acceptance for France of the four
principles laid down by Mr.. Hughes
in his proposal.
Paragraph A, of the four principles,
was as follows: "The elimination of
all capital ship building programs
either actual or projected"
Paragraph D reads: "That regard
should be had to the existing naval
strength of the comforting powers"
In, VII re lot c.fo Tor 1te,-
of the purpose of the conference and
apparent French agreement in those
purposes, officials of other delegations
than the French have been wholly at
loss to account for Frances desire
now to add ten 35,000-ton "post-Jut-
land" ships to her navy by 1885.
Members of the American group in
the committee of fifteen refused to
make any comment on the French pro-
posal or any other phase of the DELHI
erations of the committee.
The French proposals swept away
even an optimistic aftermath review
in conference circles of the British,
American and Japanese naval agree
ment 1t was plain the opinion pre-
vailed in well informed quarters if
the French government planned to
press for such naval program as
outlined by the British spokesman,
nothing that has been accomplished
up to this time in the naval confer
ence could be made effective.
A complete upset in world naval
relative could result if any nation
elected to add ten capital ships to its
fleet at this time, 1t was said If
France carried out such a project, it
was added, other naval powers prob
ably would be compelled to increase
largely present navies and no reduc-
lions in new ships would be possible.
French representatives on the COM
mittee of fifteen refused to comment
on the newly arisen naval situation.
1t had been agreed, they declared,
none of the delegations would make
public their individual views on the
matter of the French-Italian ratios
until an official announcement bad
Esbeen issued. The French delegates
added they would be glad to publish
their desires and the reasons upon
which they were based, as soon as they
had communicated with Mr.. Hughes
and had learned whether they had
been released from the agreement to