The New York herald., 1922-12-07
! II the BLACK Sea. we have heard no

{ ION the Black Sea. We have heard no
one speak with the assent Of all.
We cannot accept the position that
the future OF commerce in the Black
Sea Is the exclusive affair of the ma
tions bordering upon II. We assert
that it is the concern OF all the ma
tions OF the earth.
II is untenabie that any one ma
ton by virtue of its geographical posi-
ton should hold the power OF de-
priving every other nation OF these
rights. This would be not only against
the interests Of our national policy;
it would be against the interests OF
every nation on the Black Sea. 1t
would be against the whole historical
development OF the freedom OF the
Black Sea.
Opposes One Power Control.
Unlimited control of the Straits and
the Black Sea by any one nation Is
against the policy OF the world.
do not understand that any nation
will deny thes. fundamental princi-
. Piles OF the freedom OF the Black Sea.
l do not understand that Turkey de-
nies them. ! do not even understand
that any nation. having an eye for
extension of its territory or seeking to
control the policies OF Turkey. will be
heard here to deny them.
assume these fundamental prin-
cipies will be established by this con-
ference. and. if possible, will be guar
anteed by this conference. No other
result would satisfy the view of my
Government Without presuming to
speak specifically for the others, |
assume that no other result would
satisfy either the nations inside or
outside the straits.
1t is our view that the freedom or
the Black Sea is to be gained only
by disarmament More than this. 1t Is
our belief that even armament de-
signed to keep the straits open is. in
fact danger to the freedom OF the
Black Sea.
II any nation or group OF nations
representing the interests of all the
nations accepts the trusteeship of the
freedom of the Black Sea this trustee
ship may be carried out, we believe,
with a greater guarantee Of good faith
and constancy If reliance is placed
upon agreements rather than upon
force.
Would Not Exclude Warships.
It Is impossible for me to overlook
the proposal made by one delegation
here that by such agreements all war
ships should be excluded from the
Black Sea. ! would find 1t equally
reasonable to exclude warships from
every other international body OF
water.
No nation has gone further than
the United States in it's policies o.
naval disarmament. but no nation
would be reader to uphold the good
sense of maintaining a sufficient naval
force to act as the police of the free
seas, to protect its citizens and their
ships wherever they might be. to sup
press piracy or other menaces and
to act at times for the public good
and to give relief to the suffering. just
as the ships of war have recently
done In the Near East.
Ships of war are not necessarily
agents of destruction on the con-
trary, they may be agents of preserva-
ton and serve good and peaceful ends
in the prevention of disorder and the
maintenance of peace.
Wei believe in common with
every commercial nation--wish access
to every free body Of water In the
world. and we will not be satisfied IL
our ships of war may not pursue their
peaceful errands wherever our citi-
zens and our ships may go.