Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1921-11-30
U. S. DELEGATES
Determined TO STAND
ON NAVY PROPOSAL
tcontinued from page one.>

would not adequately cape
American or British needs.
1t was for that reason that the
American plan discarded any at
tempt to calculate fleet ratios III
terms of national needs There
vas no way from that STANDPOINT
Il was said authoritatively to give
Japan a proportion of more thah
80 per cent of the strength OF any
other power.
So, it was advised. the scheme
Of calculating in capital ships ton
mage the present existing strength
Of each of the three major naVles
and cutting off further building by
agreement was worked out. Then
to induce an agreement, percent
age for Japan exceeding her eX-
listing strength was offered by the
United States, and that was go per
cent.
The Basic Principle.
The basic principle of the plan
Is to stop where you are" it was
asserted on authority of the Amer
lean group. Japanese claims for
a 70 per cent ratio were character
lied as every extravagant," In
view of the existing strength of her
fleet. In reality, it was said, that
figure would represent an increase
OF II per cent in the present Jap
anese naval power while the
strength of Great Britain and the
United States remained stationary.
Competitors Must Stop.
II n race Is to be stopped, all
competitors must stop together, It
was said. One cannot expect to
run another ten yards. Yet it Is
fact that the japanese sub-com
mittee have urged that Japan be
permitted under an agreement
reached by a conference called 10
limit naval armament, to con
struct tonnage which would ad /
IN per cent to her navy before
stopping building.
Vice Admiral Kato's contention
for 70 per cent has been presented
at the meetings of the naval eX-
perts. Whether it was presented
by authority of the japanese dele
cation is doubtful, but it was rs'
called by American officials that
Admiral Baron Kato. a member OF
the delegation, had announced to
the press early in the conference
the Japanese purpose to seek q
Slightly higher general tonnage
than the Hughes plan contem-
plated.
To support the American view 1t
was revealed that if the strength
of the American and Japanese
fleets were calculated In terms OF
ships now in commission, plus
keels of capital ships laid down
the ratio would be 100 to As
against Japan. If the rule were
applied to add to commission cap
ital craft and keels laid down,
ships on which money had been
expended for materials, the ratio
would be 100 to IS. If the compar-
ison were made on the basis OF
completion OF ships building. in adj
dition to ships afloat, the ratio
would be 100 to 40.
Suggestion Rejected.
Another suggestion from Japan
csc sources that the comparison
should be made on the basis OF
ships in commission alone, was in
stantIy rejected by the American
delegates. That would mean that
the United States would not only
scrap all ships on which more than
, $685.. 100000 has been spent, but
would not be allowed to count thai
expenditure in estimating her nav
al strength.
Still another suggested method
Of comparison was that all pre-
, dreadnaughts less than 20 years
old of either navy be included
That calculation would have made
the ratio 100 to so against Japan.
As modification, 1t was suggest
ed that re-dreadnaughts more
than 20 years old be included ami
this would work out at 100 to SO,
So, from any point of view
japanese experts have been able
to approach the question. the
American 60 per cent ratio offer
allows a greater proportionate
strength than she now has.
Any attack ON the $3.50 ratio,
It was added, with the full weight
Of the American delegation as
sponsor for the statement, is to
be regarded only as an attack on
the fundamental principle of the
whole naval plan.