Arizona republican., 1921-11-14
TRepublIean A. P. Leased WIre1

IRepuDlicdn A. F. Eedscu Wircl
 WASHINGTON, Nov. 13.-Dele-
 gates to the arms conference had not
 recovered today from the shock of
 Secretary Hughes blunt presentation
 yesterday of the proposal for im-
 mediate reduction of the fleets of
 Great Britain, the United States and
 Japan ard for a 10-year naval hon-
 day.
 The concrete terms of the Ameri- can plan. laid before the opening ses- sion, were still in the hands of the naval experts of the other two powers chiefly concerned. Pending their con- clusions, no further step is probable. Spokesmen for Britsin and Japap had nothing to add to their previous guarded comments. As far as they went, those statements were encour- aging and 1t was certain at least, that no possibility of flat rejection of the plan existing. Without doubt. it will form the basis for reaching what ever conclusions the conference brings forth.
 With further time for study, the American plan began to stand out to- day in its true proportions. Appar- ently 1t is far more than a 1O-year naval holiday as projected, coupled with immediate heavy reduction of the fleets of the three powers. Be- yong that Is a third, equally blunt suggestion, for a continuing agree ment to limit the size of battle fleets permanently. That is what Mir.
 Hughes naval replacement plan real ly amounts to.
 In naming ships to which eacf main battle fleet would be cut if the American plan for immediate reduc- l ton was accepted, Secretary Hughes | statements shows that Great Britain | and the United States would be on an equality of battleships. but the British would retain in addition four battle | cruisers. The proposed Japanese I fleet would be composed of six bat | tleships and four battle cruisers, ! while the United States would be I content with battleships alone. This may prove more significant as l the discussions proceed, some naval officers believe. It appears that in l proposing to agree that both of the
 island powers should be provided in | equal number with the newest ad- | ditions to the main fleets. while the | United States made no attempt, for | 10 years at least, to equip American fleet similarly, the American delega- | ton sought to convey a definite as-
 surance that America, as President
 Harding said came to the discussion with no selfish purpose to serve. | No U. S. Cruisers
 Relinquishment by the United
 States of the battle cruiser element, | some officers said, at once indicated
 clearly that the navy was not being maintained with the deliberate idea | that it might some day become ad- l visable to raid the sea commerce of the two insu,ar powers, or either of ! them. Battle cruisers would be in-
 valuable; perhaps vital to successful | prosecution of a naval war across the Pacific, it was said.
 In the proposal that the other two | powers retain battle cruiser squad
 rons, also, these observers saw a pos- | sible concrete expression of Ameri-
 can recognition of the necessities in
 naval forces of those countries; of | American willingness that they
 should prosecute legitimate ventures over the world requiring far-flung merchant routes, and employ for pro- ! lection of those routes naval craft they thought best suited to the need. | As a continental power. although as-
 serting in this proposal the right to an equal footing, with any nation on | the seas, the United States might not
 necessarily retain battle cruisers as
 the other powers feel they do, it was said.
 At any rate. the American proposal | has made a flat proposition as to battle cruisers, which is was thought
 might be different of treatment at 1 the conference It remains to be seen | what Japan and Great Britain think | about it, but a long step toward