New-York tribune., 1921-11-17

skeptical. According to tho
British view, Che Importance OF assur-
ances depends very much upon what
you want to have assured.
Dominions Against Moro War
1t must also be remembered that it
In not England alone but the whole
British Empire which would be in
volved in assurances. The dominions
have made 1t plain that, having fought
iii one European war, they have no in
tention Of fighting In second unless
the cause shown is unm mstakably clear.
This Is a sentiment which no British
delegation, and especially no dclega~
tion that includes dominion statesmen,
dare ignore.
Britain would, however, welcome any
declaration by M. BRAND which opens
up what must now be regarded as an
inevitable discussion, either by the
conference or by some other body, Of
the whole problem Of European finance,
which, Of course, includes German
reparations. Britain has not proposed,
or at any rate has not formally pro-
posed, cancellation Of war debts all
round. She is making arrangements for
paying interest to the United States
on her loan. But so strong is the be-
lief in cancellation that many finan-
cial authorities in Britain would be
ready to cancel debts duo to us from
pay interest and sinking fund on the
debt due from us to the United States
They believe that it would be to our
advantage in the long run so to do.
Without entering into the economic
argument fully, may say that it is
based on the urgency Of the exchange
position.
The so-called reservations by Mr..
Balfour to the ten-year naval holiday
appear to have been misunderstood by
Britain herself. According to what I
to strengthen rather than to weaken
the plan proposed by Mr.. Hughes.
Under the ten-year holiday possible
replaccments of battleships would, as
it were, accumulate. At the end Of
the holiday Britain would have 20 re-
place approximately twelve ships in
about threee years and the United
States nearly that number. In both
countries the temptation would be to
keep privately owned shipyards going
by the simple plan of guaranteeing in
terest to the owners during the holi-
day. Thus the root Of the evil of
armaments, namely the manufacturing
plants, would remain.
The object Of Mr.. Balfour's reserva-
tion is to cut away this root. By
allowing a continuous replacement of
one ship year or, in Japan's case, of
two ships in three years, no dOckyard
need be retained by any Of the three
nations of greater capacity than this
very limited output. II, however, re-
placements have to be at the rate of
three or four ships year, it appears
that dockyards of this larger capacity
must also be kept up during the holi-
day.
TO abolish the shipyards seems to be
the best guaranty against contfnu-
ance Of battleships. If Britain is al
lowed twenty battleships, with life
for each ship Of twenty years, the
most economical plan for her would be
obviously to replace one ship every
year. That is what Mr.. Balfour seems
to have meant.
British experts are aware of the
danger of nations starting submarine
fotillas which might operate against
Britain's coasts from the continent OF
Europe. 1t is considered, however
that the British Isles will be suf.
Mr.. Hughes by the full liberty allowed
to build small warships of less than
5000 tons, as we'll as airplanes. These
would be the weapons employed
against submarines. and under the
schedule there is to be no limit put
upon their construction.
If, then, understand the British at.
titude rightly, it goes beyond what Mr.
Hughes has proposed. Our advisers
would like to see the submarine en-
tirely abolished, or at any rate re-
duced in tonnage and in numbers
Also, there is at least a strong element
among our visitors to Washington who
would like TO deal fcarlcssly with dock.
yards used only for naval construction
II must not be assumed that OIL any OF
these points the British delegates have
there are certain general lines Of
thought which it is possible to indi-
rate