The New York herald., 1921-11-24
DEFENDS FRANCES
NAVAL CONVENTIONS
Georges lie Charter Asserts
Her Stand for Submarines
Is Justified.
by GEORGES LIE CHARTER.
Corresponesnt Journal Desbots.


Special Despatch to THE New YoaK HERALD.
New York Herald Bureau,
Washington. ID. C.. Nov. e3. I o..
An article Which was published in a
morning newspaper yesterday announc-
ing a sensational naval programme OF
France has given birth to many conflict
ing stories during the day, and, although
denied in an official statement OF NJ.
BRAND this morning, 1t seems to have
been particularly resented in British
quarters. The Misunderstanding must
not last.
do not think that misquote one OF
the best spokesmen Of the British delega-
tion If | summarize as follows what he
told me in the lobby Of the New Willard
to day
France had better to be careful l
am one OF the best friends of France.
But it is impossible for the best friends
of France in my country to overlook
what she is doing or trying to do now.
NJ BRAND of course was quite right
when he spoke last Monday Of the land
forces which France is obliged to keep.
There is nothing to be added to what Mr.
Balfour said on the subject. But when
Nj. BRAND. speaking of the French
navy. insists now that France must have
more and more submarines. we cease to
be approba tive or indifferent. We 90 not
want France to arm herself against Eng
land"
could only repeat what had been
said to me by one Of the men in the best
position to know TO the effect that: First.
the article according to VI. BRAND, was
not accurate. But had the article been
a strict enumeration of facts, how could
any unprejudiced Briton infer that the
French submarines were to be built In
an aggressive spirit and with an uti-
mate thought Of war against England? ?
A nation must look for safe defence ac-
cording to her geographical position and
TO her financial means. France has two
coasts to protect. but she has neither
reason nor thought of protecting them
against England. She has still less rea-
son or thought of ever attacking Eng
land.
1t Is fact that Germany has now
nc navy, and France has certainly not,
at the present moment. TO fear any
naval attack from her. But Germany,
according to the Versailles treaty, which
i- still recognized by England. will be
allowed to possess some navy after a
certain period. Why should not France
be allowed TO have one without waiting
for Germany TO have hers? And is
Germany--or England. since the sug-
gestion comes from British quarters
the only naval agressor that France
may fear? Has not England herself a
feet?
But France has no thought that this
feet is specially kept to be turned some
time against her. Moreover, France has
Mediterrean coast. which is exposed to
any attack and which she must protect.
Ie she shooses the submarines for means
of protection rather than capital ships,
II is only. as NJ. BRAND stated, because
submarines are the weapons of the
weak.
France. after five years of exhaust
ing war on her own soil. does certainly
not profess to be as strong as Mr..
Balfour emphatically declared. a week
ago. that England still is. So il may
not appear unfair IL France should be
allowed to choose her own means Of pro-
lection and self defense according to
Ter own needs and resources. Has not
England acted in the same way without
mourning any protest or suspicion from
France. and are the means chosen by
her in any way less defensive, less ter
rible than the French ones?
Hope and faith are now shown in
French quarters that these facts had
only to be exposed. in all candor. to the
well known and always appreciated fair
ness and soundness of judgment of our
British friends. to remove a misunder-
standing that never should have oc-
Cured