Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1922-01-13
BRITISH-JAPAN
PROTEST HOLDS
BACK PROGRESS
New Hitch Arises in Plans for
Literal Scrapping of
NavieS.
JAPS ARE INDEPENDENT
Special to Indiana Daily Times
and Philadelphia Public Ledger.
BY ROBERT BARRY.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 13.-Anglo-Ja
nese objections to American proposals for
outright scraDping Of capital ships to be
consigned to Davy Jones under the
Hughes naval reduction program has
caused a further hitch in the i've power
treaty negotiations. The question of bat
tleship destruction brought up issues
which had to be referred to London and
Toxic. II is not regarded as a likely
cause Of serious difference.
Secretary Hughes and the American
naval experts propose there shall be ac-
tual "scrapping' so under no, conceivable
circumstances could the million odd tons
of capital ships be converted in war en-
ergencies into fighting units.
Franch support was accorded the Ameri-
can stand in the committee of delegation
heads, but that is not especially signif-
icant, since France viii have little if any
thing to scrap under the treaty.
Albert Sarraut, chief of the French
delegation, gave notice that, so far as he
was advised, there has been no change of
policy by his government with reference
to submarines. Reports from Paris that
the agreement reached at Cannes had in
luenced a right -about-face by BRAND
found no confirmation IN French circles
here
FRENCH PROMISE
NEW STATEMENT.
NJ. Sarraut gave every indication he
would make d restatement of the French
insistence on use of the submarine for
defensive purposes, following Arthur j.
Bafours public address urging aboli-
ton.
Matters bearing on Notifications IN the
''regions Of the Pacific" and the de-
termination Of what constitutes Japan
proper, have been referred for instruc-
tons" but it is established rather clear
~ that II is British, not Japanese. reser-
vations that are holding such questions
in allegiance.
Conversations relative to Japan prop
er" developed a Japanese expectation the
exchange Of notes" necessary to have
the homeland Of Japan excluded from the
four-power pact in the Pacific would take
place very shortly"
1t was revealed, also, IN unmistakable
terms, Neither American nor japanese,
but, as the phrase is understood in Japan,
the homeland" within the scope Of the
Pacific agreement. That was done be-
cause Of the possible effect on Austral-
ian and New Zealand dignity. Downing
Street was chary Of giving them pro-
tective status, which the japanese held
Objectionably patrOnizing to them,
HUGHES KEEPS
OPEN MIND.
1t was learned, furthermore, Secretary
Hughes, who has been criticized by SEN
ate opponents Of the treaty because Of
his supposed insistence on the including
Of Japan proper, did not take that stand
at any time during the big three" nego-
tiations which produced the pact He
was willing, it was stated in japanese
quarters, to agree to either definition, his
chief concern being that there should be
precise understanding as to whatever was
decided.
The japanese were opposed to the in
clusion Of their homeland, but yielded
TO British wishes. Subsequent develop
ments caused the American and Jap
anese delegations to bear the burden of
popular objection in the United States
and Japan Negotiations looking to the
exclusion Of the homeland have been
essentially an Anglo-Japanese affair, not
an American-Japan one.
An American authority promised pre-
else definitions in all territorial matters
affected by the naval treaty.
In regard TO the definition Of Japan
proper, phrase occurring in the naval
treaty in respect of Pacific Notifications.
it was intimated Japan does not wish
other people to define what is and what
is not Japan proper, that being a matter
solely for settlement by Japan; but there
had been no question, it was added,
about the precise japanese islands to be
included in the Notifications agreement
These islands, the only Japanese islands
discussed in this connection, it was said
are the BONN Islands and Oshima upon