The New York herald., 1922-04-12
HUGHES JOINS Fight
TO HALT navy Slash
Declares Provisions of 1923
Appropriation Bill Are
Inadequate.
DEMANDS 5-5-3 RATIO
$1,000 Personnel Means an
Abandonment of Wash
ington Conference.
NAVY TREATY TO STAND
Secretary's Letter Is First Of
ficial Notice Administra-
ton Is Firm.
NAVY TREATY TO STAND
Special Dispatch % THE NEW SonN HERALD.


In letter written to-day by Sec
retary Hughes to Representative John
J. Rogers (Mass) OF the House Com
mittee on Foreign Affairs. Secretary
Hughes entered the fight for the
5-5-3 ratio and went to the assistance
OF the navy by declaring the pro-
visions OF the 1929 appropriation bill.
on which general debate is now in
progress in the House. were made
quate
1t was the first official statement
that the naval policy developed in the
arms conference should be adhered to
and that American naval strength
should not be reduced to two-thirds
that OF Great Britain and slightly
less than that OF Japan, as advocated
by the Appropriations Committee.
Those who seek to cut the navy by
Withholding necessary appropriations at
tempted to discredit the Hughes letter
insisting the executive branch OF the
Government should not be allowed TO en-
croach on the legislative powers OF Con-
grcss to provide for national defence.
The conference. they helo. might fix a
maximum of naval strength. but not =
minimum.
\ big Navy" Men Confident.
\ The big navy advocates seemed to
have all the advantage to-day. and they
were confident the tide was turning In
their behalf. predicting the House would
reject the proposal for naval strength
of $1,000 men and adopt the recommeno
dation Of the minority members of the
Appropriations Committee for $4,000.
Indications are the vote early next week
will be close.
At adjournment tonight the House
decided to continue considera tion OF the
bill until final disposition. General de.
bate Will end Tomorrow, when the bill
itself win be taken up. item BY item
under the five minute rule.
Opponents of reduction made personal
attacks on the ability OF the appropria-
tions COMMITTEES membership to decide
what should be the size OF the enlisted
personnel They would prefer, they
said. to abide by estimates of naval ex-
perts rather than to yield to the "ama-
teur guesscs'' of members of Congress.
Results OF bombing tests last summer
to determine the ability of airpanes to
sink warships were brought into the ar
gument by the advocates of the bill.
They argued that conditions OF warfare
have so changed since the Development
of aircraft that a large navy is no
longer essential to American protection.
insisting that If an enemy fleet should
attack the United States it would he
natural that aircraft should fly from the
shore stations and sink the warships.
toward the end OF the days debate
Under this treaty the>United States
IS allowed now to retain eighteen capital
ships Mr.. Hughes said. You say you
are advised by the Navy Department
that the proposed reduction in personnel
will mean that not exceeding thirteen
capital ships can be kept In commission
AS to this ! am not qualified to express
an expert opinion. but I have ques-
toned naval experts with whom the
American delegates consulted during the
recent conference and whom we found
both accurate and IN sympathy with the
principle OF Iimita don by agreement
and am advised the proposed number
OF enlisted men is far below the number
required to maintain our navy upon the
basis contemplated by the treaty. Ac-
cepting this statement OF fact, the only
question would seem to be whether our
navy should be reduced below the treaty
standard by a provision of personnel
Inadequate TO maintain II.
ITO this question I think there can
be but one answer. | strongly believe t
would be most injurious to the interests
or the United States not to maintain
fully the standard of the treaty.
Must Uphold Treaty.
what was tho purpose OF the corr
fererce II II was deemed to ba wise
policy to cut tho navy irrespective OF
an agreement with the other Powers? :?
Ratification OF the conference treaties Is
Important but IL IL no less important
that the policy which they defined should
be adhered to by agreement OF the
raval Powers construction programs
we're virtually abandoned and limlta-
tions were fixed. IL would be truly ex-
taordinary and n manifest reflection
upon the work Of the conference if the
navy OF the Uitftod states were reduced
below the standard, thus established.
''The American delegates were able to
effect an agreement in this difficult and
important matter because they asked
for limitations In proportion to existing
r.avai strength. A very large reduction
was thus effected, while national secur-
ity was left unimpaired. To alter that
relation would be very serious matter
for tho United states. both iinpairins its
prestige and putting its security in
jeopardy.
"The american delegates deemed IL
essential they should stand infIexibly
for the ratio shown by existing strength
and thus they insisted upon a replace
ment schedule which would give equality
with Great Britain and ratio Of 5 to 3
with Japan. This result was achieved
We should have taken wholly hide
fensible position had we asked for less.
But Of what avail are this labor and
success " the navy Is not kept up to an
agreed standard?
~ have been speaking OF existing con-
ditions. but what Of the future? Upon
what basis is the United States TO enter
future negotiations on the subject OF
naval armament Are we 10 impair
our existing relative strength and ac-
cent an inferior position? I should sup
pose that such n proposition would re-
qulre only to be stated and that no ono
would defend a..
II trust an adequate personnel will he
supplied 10 maintain the eighteen battle.
ships the United states is entitled 20
keep. together with auxiliaries that
would be appropriate to such a feet
Jf course T fully accept the viaw the
4ovv m tho radt,ocd haafe should ho