The New York herald., 1921-12-29
Continued from First Page.

COnOuueQ from + flISt Ibg0.
''of application" OF this agreement
would be easy of settlement, he said.
through consideration OF such qualifca-
tions "as 1t may be useful to introduce"
in connection with the naval holiday
enabling Powers to lay down in 1927
ships to replace those which have
reached their twetieth year Of existence.
"It Will likewise be easy to settle the
question still outstanding" ne said. "of
the duration of the agreement as to
limitation of capital ship tonnage"
In presenting the program Of 10000
tons of submarines and $3.50, 900 tons Of
auxiliary craft for France. NJ Sarraut
said the delegation has been instructed
to consent to no concession on the above
figures
ITO sum up" M. Sarraut continued,
France accepts as regards capital
ships the sacrifices which she must face
in order to meet the views of the con-
ference. and which represents an impor-
tant reduction of her normal sea power.
She limits the program OF the future
constitution. of her fleet to $4,000 tons
for auxiliary craft and to $4,000 tons
for submarines"
Secretary Hughes in reply said he
was gratified at French acceptance of
the capital ship tonnage limitation. as
capital ships were the chief weapon Of
offense. and IL the conference succeeded.
as 1t seemed evident II would. in reduc-
ing 'tn fairly satisfactory manner"
armaments represented in capital ships.
that alone would aid '3n establishing q
better basis Of lasting peace"
IL. o4v,Av x1-tA
the French statement as to submarines,
Mr.. Hughes said that II these vessels
were to be available for defensive pur-
loses in connection with feet move
ments "they should bear some definite
proportion TO the fighting fleets" The
French suggestion of 10000 tons ION
any basis Of a practicable ratio" he
added. would involve the assumption
that Great Britain and the United
States Increase their submarine ton
nage proportionately with the French.
This could hardly he called a lin
itation or reduction" he continued.
Furthermore II e. large number OF sub
marines were to be provided then cruis-
ers and destroyers. the natural enemy
Of submarines, would have to be pro-
yided In numbers adequate to deal
with the situation created by a large
submarine fleet"
"a Serious Question"
Mr.. Hughes said 1t was serious
question whether anything could be ac-
complished In the way Of limiting ton
mage of submarines and auxiliary craft
Ire added that he did not desire at this
time and In view OF the existing situa-
ton to discuss details of the tonnage
limitations France had proposed for
herself, but that he wished to say ''that
an agreement for expansion. Of arma-
ment was not under consideration"
"T-he conference" Mr.. Hughes re-
minded the committee, was called to
consider the limitation Of armament"
The Secretary added that he did not
wish 'in any way TO detract from the
Importance of tho definite acceptance by
France of the program for capital
ships" in what he had said as to sub
marines.
Mr.. Balfcur. who followed Mr.
Hughes. said that the French statement
had profoundly disappointed him." al
though he reJoiced In the French accept
ance of the capital ship ratio and agreed
that IL nothing else was done as to naval
disarmament. the scheme already In
sight with regard to the limitation OF
capital ships did immensely relieve the
burden Of armament upon an overbur-
deDed world"
Mr.. Balfour said he did not regard the
French action as to capital ships as an
Overwhelming sacrifice" as the figure
of 175, 900 tons would be found TO mean
an increase In relative strength for her
that he did not begrudge. The French
did propose, ne added, to increase the
number of submarines threefold." and he
pointed out that while Frances 10000
| tons in submersibIes would equal Tho
| fleets of Great Britain and the United
States in size they would represent &c
the extent OF 10000 tons submarines OF
| a newer typo" than either other navy
possessed. This made II certain, he said
| that if France carried out her submarine
program her submarines would exceed
those Of any other Power in the world.
Coupled with the announcement tha
the French Government proposed also al
Increase In auxiliary tonnage, Mr.. Bal.
| four said: 'It must be acknowledge
| that this constituted a somewhat singu.
lar contribution to the labors Of con
ference called for diminution OF arma.
ment." He also pointed out that In,
French proposed. even as to the ten yeal
capital ship holiday ito begin replacing
ships in 1927" but added that this Will,
it seemed TO be a serious interference,
| with the proposal Tor ten years nava
holiday" was only small part OF tn,
anxiety and disappointment which th'
French programme had created" In hi'
mind.
.To Destroy Commerce."
| The British delegate declared It "wa,
| perfectly obvious that the proposed
10000 tons OF submarines were intended
to destrop commerce"
They could not be intended for an,
other purpose" he said. adding:
THE whole OF this controversy vii
again come up before a public confer
enoe," for which occasion he reserved
himself
Mr.. Baifour said he must dwell on tn,
effect the French declaration OF nava
policy must inevitably produce upor
British opinion
"It was perfectly clear" he said. "tha
~ at our very gates a fleet OF 10000 tom
of submarines 100000 OF which are to h
OF newer type) are to be constructed
no limitation OF any kind on auxiliar!
vessels capable OF dealing with sub
marines could be admitted by the gov
ernment, which no represented"
Replying to Mr.. Balfour. M. Sarrau
said he could not comment 'on the or
| g.. 30 ,,,u sroyeYy, fy,rta adding fha