New-York tribune., 1921-12-23

the submarine would not be defended
the reach of all. 1t might perhaps be
cheap for the aggressor, but it was
not SO FOR the victim. The average
numbe- Of German submarines at sea
slmu!t leously during the late war
had MT been more than niue or ten.
but Great Britain had had to maintain
an average of no less than 5000 anti
submarine surface craft in order to
sI aeal with these. 1t could be seen,
form of war for the defender.
The British delegation were anxious
TO contribute toward the ideals oil tho
present conference. They dssireG nor nor
only Il limitation of armamenfs h,,t
also Limitation Of expenditures which
instituted SO great a burden in time
o! peace; That Was why Great Brit
am, which had the tradition of ssossnss-
ing the greatest navy, had welcomed the
proposals for curbing capital ships.
What should we gain, however, if ihis
competition were merely transferred
10 submarines? Certainly not much.
and meanwhile the submarines threat
eneo our very life and existence. But
II 5Se submarine were abolished we
/, could accept, with notifications in de-
| tail, practically the whole Of he
american proposals in regard to the
llghtenlng of these burdens.
A weapon of Piracy
lord Lee said he was not impressed
with the argument that because Il vas
1onnd impossible to deal effectively
with poison gas or air bombs. which
were py-prcducts OF essential indus
Irles, we could not deal with the sub
| -,,b,
py-product OF any Industry, but was es
sent'a!ly all offensive weapon. He
therefore, said that it could be and
therefore, ought to be abolished. r.
was weapon of murder and piracv
and, the drowning OF non-combatants.
lG mad been used to sink passenger
SHIPS, cargo shops and even hospital
sh'ps. Icchnlcally the submarine was
SO constructed that it could not be
utilized to rescue even women and chill
dren from sinking ships. That was
why. he hoped that the conference
would not give it a new lease of life.
HE had endeavored to state frankly
that the submarine was only to linn
lted extent weapon of defense. and
that for offense 1T was only really
valuable when used against merchant
snlps, and that it constituted the great
est peril to which the mercantile
@tt">3AC W viz WI iN wac expOSGU, + Jr
defense he did not say 1t was useless,
but merely inefficient, and that the ais-.
advantages exceeded the advantages
except for war on the mercantile
marine. Tie submarine was the only
class of vessel for which the confer
ence was asked to eive--he would NOT
say. iicerse--but permission to thrive
and multiply 1t would be g. great dis
appointment il the British Empire
delegation failed to persuade the con,
terence to. get rid OF this weapon
which involved SO much evil to peoples
who live on or by the sea.
TO show the earnestness of the
British government in this matter, Lord
Lee pointed out that Great Britain
possessed. e.. the largest and probably the
most efficient submarine navy in the
world, composed of 100 vessels of So
ooo tons. She was prepared to SCRAP
tne whole of this great fleet and to
disband the personnel, provided that
the other powers would do the same
That was the British offer to the world
and he believed that it was a greater
contribution to the cause Of humanity
than even the limitation of capital
ships.
However, it was useIess to be blind
to the facts of the position. and bs
hardly hoped to carry with him all ths
powers present at that table, though
he believed that in the end all civilized
powers would cUme around to the Brit
ish point Of view. In any event, the
Pritish Emnire delegation did not in,
tend that the settlement in regard to
capital ships should be affected if thev
failed to carry their point in rcgard
to the abolition OF submarines. Should
ne fail to convince his colleagues, he
would. nevertheless. welcome anv sue-
gestlons for the reduction and restric-
| ton OF submarines which they might
ike TO make, and in particular. he
would await with the greatest inter
est the proposals OF his French col
leagues. which had been promised
earlier in the day.
U, s. Tonnage Figures Given
"Upon the conclusion of Lord Lees
remarks 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 al
the committee had had the privilege
OF listening, but he merely wished Ia
mterpolate statement giving the fig
ures supplied by the American nava]
experts, and upon which the American
proposal was based, concerning the
submarine tonnage built and building.
since thasa. figures did not appear to
coincide with those raferred to by
Lord Lee. According to the American
ngures this tonnage is as follows:
united States. & ooe
Trsnes oF"aih.'. ,,......-.--- sa.$s4
ssass '.'..,,..... .........,.,,..t... 40 22s
-f@" '''''''.' .,........,,s,..s. 81. 400
"The United States has %hnrafor.