Evening star., 1921-12-03
Explanation Sought
of Relation of
5-5-3 to 6-5-3.
!U. S. TAKES VESSELS
READY FOR BUILDING
Reply Declares War Put
| British Types Behind
Two Other Nations.

BY the Associated Press.
The Associated Press is able today
to present some of the official figures
involved in the exchanges between
American and Japanese experts over
the "5-5-3" ratio proposal and the
japanese counter claim for 1910
I" status.
In submitting their original ques-
tionnaire to the American experts ask
ing explanation Of the Hughes pro-
posal on seven specific points, the
Japanese officers included this ques-
ton:
Explain the relation between the
replacement ratio Of '50-50-30 and
the existing ratio of '6o-5O-30.' re-
spectively. of Great Britain. the
United States and Japan"
Ask Means Of Calculation.
This was supplemented by the in
quiry:
Explain means by which the exist
ing strength of the British navy has
been calculated as 100000 TONS
In answer. the American experts
said:
although Great Britain has not
laid the keels of her four new Hoods,
keels of the Takao and the Atago,
they have spent money on all. In or
der to be entirely fair. therefore. these
ships were included in the lists of
their respective nations, with the con-
sequent increase inss their. relattye
strengths When this was done. the
tonnage measure of naval strength
between the United States and Japan
was as follows: United States, LIS
$50; Japan, 5ss.s00; ratio, United
States, 100 per cent; Japan. So per
cent"
The American Reply.
AS to the ''60-50-3 -30"- existing strength
ratio calculation, the American an
swer explained:
1.-The war conditions caused Great
Britain to suspend her building pro-
gram. In consequence, her ships are
relatively older in type than those OF
the United States and Japan. This
fact was considered in allotting her
$4,000 tons for the present. but the
was 100000 tons"
In explaining. as asked by the Japa-
nese, the method of calculation Of ex-
listing strength, the American experts
said that the point taken was keels
actually laid down as of November II.
the date of the opening of the confer
ence. The further explanations given
above, however. show that this was not
held rigidly against Great. Britain and
Japan in the American plan. but only
against the United States. Money spent
by Great Britain and Japan on ships not
yet laid down was figured into the ex-
isting strength of those navies. but not
into American existing strength.
The Japanese experts also required
a specific list of the ships of the United
States and Japan on which the calcu-
lation of existing strength was based,
the degree of completion allowed for
each ship building and asked whether
differences in methods of figuring ton
mage used by the three nations were
allowed for in the calculations. This
information was supplied in the Ameri-
can reply, with the assurance that the
tonnage figures of each foreign ship had
been recalculated on the American basis
to arrive at a fair comparison.
Table Sets Out Relatfvities.
On the basis of these figures and also
using Japanese estimates Of Japanese
and American strength as furnished
by the Japanese experts in memoranda,
the American experts then set out the
naval "relativities" of the two powers
in tables as follows:
First, American estimate Of American
strength and American estimate of Jap
aneSe strength.