Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1921-11-26
REASON FOR HUGHES
PROPOSAL IS OUT
BY DAVID LAWRENCE
Geas&d Wire Service to The Journal.)
(CnDVripht 1901 \

" AOI11ANNIOANJ 4NOH' G7. AAS
real reason for the proposal of Sec
rotary Hughes and the American
navy, that hereafter no battleships
shall be built by any nation larger
than $4,000 tons, is just coming to
the surface. The United States
does not wish to have any battle
ships too large to go through the
Panama canal.
Before the present conference was
convened and the armament race
was at it's heighth, there was talk
of 10000 and 5O,O0O-ton battleships
to be built by Japan. This would
have been met by the construction
of American battleships OF equal
size, but these vessels would nave
been valuable to the United States
only in the Pacific where they would
have had to be kept most OF the
time.
American naval policy, at least for
the present, contemplates a fleet
divided between the Atlantic and
the Pacific, and one Of the chler
values of the canal is that strate-
gically it gives the United States
great defensive strength. The dis
advantage of having vessels in the
Pacific which must round Cape Horn
was conspicuously illustrated in the
Spanish-American war when Flight
| ing Bob" Evans made his memorable
trip from Pacific to Atlantic waters
to assist the squadrons off the Gu
| ban coast.
Canal Too Small a-
The Panama canal at present Is
able to accommodate vessels WHIP
a displacement of 10000 tons COM
fortably, but the engineers VINO
built the ditch did not contemplate
ships greater than ITO feet wide.
! There now are no vessels af1oat as
wide as this, so the Hughes proposal
affects only the future. 1t reads as
| follows:
"That no capital ship, shall be
built in replacement with a tonnage
| displacement of more than 35,OOO
TONS"
MIR. Hughes gave no reasons or ar
gument for the foregoing sugges-
ton, but naval experts now realize
what was back Of it. OF course
there were other reasons Tor tnlS
limitation such as stabil1Zlng the
value Of existing battleships and ar
mament.
When the Panama canal was built
+bera was considerable discussion
about the future size Of battleshlps
and some engineers advocated a
width of at least 100 or 100 feet ana
now experts are inclined to agree
4hat the ditch should have Deen
wider than no. AS for length, the
newest type of battle cruisers are ap-
nroximately 900 feet long, while the
locks are not much more than l,OOO
feet in length.
1O8 Feet Big Enough
There are those who believe that
good fighting craft of as much as
so 900 tons displacement could pe
built with a width Of 108 feet which
would enable them to pass through
the canal but while American shlps
would have to meet that handicap
this would not be the case with Japa-
nese battleships which have no spe-
cial reason for wanting to get into
the Atlantic quickly. The limitation
to $4,000 tons will have ithe effect,
therefore, of placing the United
States on a parity with Japan with
respect to all new battleships built
to replace those which may become
obsolete during the ten-year naval
holiday.
Under the Hughes proposals the
United States would scrap vessels OF
the Indiana, Iowa, Montana and
North Carolina type with an estimat-
ed displacement of $4,000 tons the
building of which has been author
lied. OF course the larger the ship,
the greater the size of guns and
armament and therefore the more
costly the whole vessel becomes.
Just as soon as one nation builds a
vessel of larger type than any other
afloat, Immediately all ships of pre-
ceding classes which do not carry
as big guns are considered ''obsolete"
in the natal sense and the construc-
ton engineers turn their thoughts
to ships of the larger size.
The Japanese battleship, 'Nagato,"
is the largest afloat and the Unit
ed States has been building to match
the Japanese in that class. Similarly
the Hood type of battleships built by
Great Britain which are to be scrap
ped under the Hughes program are
! potential challengers in the arma-
| ment race. The proposal to limit
| all battleShipS to $4,000 tons dis
placement means, therefore, some
| stability in the armament competl-
| ton. AT the same time it removes
| the danger Of longer and wider YES
sells than the Panama canal could ac-
|