New-York tribune., 1922-03-19

ference 10 now a matter Of his
3 tor,cai record, there are cerssir
aftermaths which are OF purely
Europeaa concern aad which must fern.
she basis Of 7ou~parlers. especially be-
tween England and Franee This il
becoming very apparent OF th:s side
ot the Aslaneic.
Leader in pab,ic affairs il France
rs we'll SIS Frenchmeu who remained in
touch with develoo,neats in WasAsn--
Con sre perfectly willing to adlaie thnt
France made some serious mistakes
*here and failed properly 70 inrerpres
either the Anglo Saxon O. Oriental
psychology which played an important
part arouad the conference table. Bua
1tsis difficult to find Frsnchmc., VINO
sre vi-ling-weeks after The confer
ence-so admit thas France was wrong
n demanding aid insisting upon What
FRENCH naval experts considered ample
submarines TO guarantee colonial con-
--un.catioas.
Warm de6aces in the conference IT,
self, including the Castex incident. the
.jolemics in the French and British
22ess ana rather unblanketed criticism.
"a tAs American prasA-A.. these
franco blaaes OF England All these
things, Frenchmen believe, were the
reauit OF big British mistake. ard
{ IS certain that aIl will no: be as
we'll IS II might be until French and
British statesmen, or experts. get TO-
seSher for frank, loyal agreement Oh
she Angio-French submarine situation.
This may be expected to follow or even
Precede the signatu-e Of the projected
AHglo-French security pact.
Naval Commission Head
Demands Submarine Par!ey
One Of the strongest demands for an
-AH&lo-trencA submarine parley comes
rom the pen OF Senator Gustava de
1Asrs9ezec, writing publicly here IN his
capacity rs president Of the Senate
Naval Commission. Senator de Ker-
guezec is of the Breton segfsring s5ocl,
and is therefore a ccmpat-iot OF for
Aer Premier Aristide BRAND. Under
the caption "ASter Washington-Before
GeAoa,' he writes III the "Matiu":
We desire public explanation v,itA
England oil the subject of submarines,
since she seems to fear them. Now
that The Washington conference is over.
Let US Loyalty draw & lesson from, j.
u an perfectly willing to admit that
1ur representative, Admiral de Bon,
sometimes made mistakes, but in re
turn l demand that our English friends
admit that Lord Lee was not a.ways
n the right. We both made mistakes.
'We claimed the right Of building
$4,000 tons of capital chips, while we
Aad neither the desire nor the means
Of accomplishing such g program. By
mat we entirely ruined M. Brands
york, which tried to prove to our
American friends that re did not want
q man nor gun more than was naces-
eary Tor our defense; we assisted that
propaganda, which is trying to prove
that We are iInperialistic; we were en-
ptoying parade policy, since our de-
mands did nos correspond with any
practically possibility, and, finally, we
lost both the cause OF our army and
Of our feet at the same time.
after having shown our faults,
think have the right OF telling the
English that they we're not entirely
innocent Of mistakes at the confer
ence. The day after Mr.. Briand'a
speech 4. G. Wells wrote en- article
claiming that France was preparing
new way. In this article, before the
question CT submarines had been
brought Up, Wells Stated that France
looked forward TO submarine war
With England. Two days later Lloyd
Geolge's paper, The Daily Chronicie,'
\ Arepeated the same accusations. This
campaign seems TO have been inspired
sTy Lord Riddle, who repeated prac-
fio&liy the same thing in all the salone.
War Taught England
Value OF Submarines
cit was doubtless because the .esoons
VI N-AS ~ SA-N - 81 iAdo laOShC EnEIGnQ
tAat her enormous floating fortresses
were not IS useful as she had supposed,
sad She only way she could hold the
hegerony Of European waters was by
The suppression OF submarines But
vhy dida't they uphold this belief
frankly? Mr. Balfour and Lord Lee
Claimed that submarines could not al
feet warships, only nleuaced fre;ghters
and passenger ships, and that conse-
euently Frances marine ideal Was TO
torpedo defenceless boats and people.
"Mr. balfour and Lord Les seemed
10 forget that & small number Of slew
inp-ovised submarines, manned BY
soldiers Of fortune, sank the battle
ships Audacious. Triumph, CORVALLIS,
Formidahle, Goliath, Majestic; the bat
tle cruisers Cressy, Aboukir, Hogue;
the cruisers Nottingham, Hawke,
Iermes; tAe light cruisers Falmouth,
Amphion, Pathfinder, and the gunboat
Niger, with maybe hundred destroy
ers, torpedo boats and other naval
boats.
They likewise seem to forget shat
the English used submarines to destroy
The German submarines. And also, the
mothers, widows and orphans OF those