Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1922-01-10
REJECT ALL PLANS
/. TO LIMIT AIRCRAFT
Not Practicable to Impose
Restrictions Now, Arms
Delegates Decide.
BY the Associated Press.

OViVSolVo DVVtuVa
BY the Associated Press.
All suggestions for limitation OF
military aircraft were thrust aside
as impracticable yesterday by the ma
val committee of the arms confer
ence. the following resolution being
adopted:
THE committee is of the opinion
that it is not at present practicable
to impose any effective limitations
| upon the numbers or characteristics
of aircraft. either commercial or
military"
AT the same time. agreement was
| reached for the creation of mixed
! commission Of experts and jurists to
take up at some future time a study
/, of the rules of warfare in their appli-
| cation to aerial operations. The ex-
act wording of the resolution to this
end. including the specific mission of
| the commission and just how the body
| was to be constituted. was left to the
drafting committee.
Schanzer Expresses Regret.
I Senator SchanZer of Italy expressed
regret that it was the opinion of the
conference that nothing could now be
undertaken in the way of limiting
military aviation to avoid competi-
ton. as competitive building of CAPT
tai ships was to be curbed. He sug
SeSted a future conference on the
subject and called attention to the
fact that Italy's representative on
the subcommittee had thought some
limitation of air forces might be pos
slble through restriction of the num-
bers of military pilots.
Senator Underwood replied that air
planes and dirigibles both We're used
| for land and naval warfare and for
commercial purposes. A pilot train
ing for commercial work could fly
, military machine. ne added. and for
| this reason and also because the
question of land armament was not to
be taken up by the present confer
ence. he agreed With the TECHNICAL
committee that aircraft limi tations
were impracticable.
BnlfOur Points Out Reasons.
Mr.. Balfour pointed out that many
persons thought Development of avia-
ton would exert an immense intiu-
ence upon economic development of
mankind" adding that restrictions on
aircrah development, therefore, would
restrict also the peaceful purposes
of International intercommunication
whatever the future might make pos.
sibie, he said. present knowledge
| would not permit distinction be-
tween lighting and commercial de-
velopment in the air.
NJ. Sarraut. for the French shared
this view. He We uld regard with APP
prehension, he sa ID, anything of a ma
tuie to ,paralyze the progress of
avia ton +"
Baron kato. for Japan, said the time
would come when aircraft limitations
would be nee Ssary, but agreed that
1t could not be done now, and Mr.
m n
as against any attempt to restrict air
plane development.
Question OF DiriEibles.
This left the question of dirfgibles to
be considered, Mr. Hughes said. He
; read the report of the subcommittee
showing that limit of size of dirigibles
was at least practicable. Whether the
limitation way of fixing the size of
heavier than-air craft, he said would
| be more than Offset by restrictions thus
placed on commercial use of such craft
was for the committee to decide
Senator SchanZer suggested that by
striking the words Fighter than air.
out of the subcommittee conclusion il
could be made applicable to all aircraft,
and this was done after Mr.. Balfour
had inserted the words Eat present" in
the declaration that limitation of air
forces was impracticable
the subcommittee suggestion that
another conference be called to consider
the rules or war applying to aircraft
then was taken up. Senator Schanzer
said Italy considered essential that Ger
tain principles of international law in
this connection be "solemnly proclaim
ed by the conference if it could go no
farther. He recalled the bombing of
French. BritisH and Italian cities dur
women and children and destruction to
buildings and works of art (which were
! the patrlmony Of the whole of hui
manity.''
Admiral de Bon Agrees,
Admiral de Bon of France concurred,
citing Hague conventions as against
the bombardment of unfortified towns
pointed out, however, that those con-
Ventlons were aimed in that respect
at land or naval bombardment, not
specifically nor by implication at air
craft bombing. He added that Paris
was fortified and that most of the
cities of Europe had some sort of
defense which might be held to make
them liable to bomba rdment by an
| enemy, and suggested that the COM
mittee might act to extend the rule
Of International law more clearly and
apply it to aircraft.
There were two rules, Mr.. Root
said, one that defended town must
not be bombarded without warning
~ PSih TO seek
safety. and the other that unde-
Tended towns coGld not be lombard
ed at all. The spirit of these would
prevent aircraft from bombarding
any town whatever he said, adding:
"Bombard railroad junction,
station crossing? Yes. lombard a
munitions factory? Yes. But the GER
ter of an innocent population? No
Not under any circumstances at ALL.
Suggests a Commission,
The rules, Mr.. Root insisted, were
inadequate as they are, and Mr.
Hughes, in agreement, said the mat
ter of necessity would require Care
full consideration. He suggested a
provision for future Commission
of jurists."
Sir Robert Borden said it was OBJ
vious the present conference could
not give the question adequate con-
sideration and Mr.. Balfour agreed but
suggested that the future commission
include other than jurists and that
it be limited specifically to the terms
of the American agenda, considera-
ton of rules for the control of new
agencies of warfare"
The subject finally was sent to the
drafting committee with the general
adherence of all delegations to the
proposal for future conference
to work out rules of warfare of this
nature. :,
AnnYYYrnEn IN rYYAnrr