The Seward gateway., 1923-02-06
OUR LAVAL POLICY

The president in signing the naval bill which contains provision in the form of request from Congress that the executive department negotiate with the other powers for the further zaduction of naval armament, did not indicate what his attitude on the cues ton would be but it is known that his personai and official position has not been changed since the first arms linn itation conference was called.
 But the probability is that MT w. G. HarGing will hesitate to call anoth- CT conference in the near future un less the ueaties agreed upon in 1922 are ratified.
 The asre clnents have been approv- ed ip accordance with the constitu- tional procedure of the United States Great Britain and Japan, but the; sill rest in the pigeon-holes at Paris and Rome It was announced recently that a move for ratification would be un- dertaken by the French government, but probably the new situation arising from the repa.ations question will cause further delay. Meanwhile the Italian government, though represent cd to be favorable to ratification, is waiting fo~ Paris to act, feeling that the first move is up to France
 The first Washington conference achieved noteworthy results, but as finally negotiated the treaties provide only for reduction in the tonnage of capital ships and air plane carriers. France opposed further limitation of submarine construction and Great Britain refused under the circumstanc es to agree on radical reduction in the number of cruisers was that these vii tai questions remained unsettled by the agreement. Meanwhile, the varl- ous powers have started the conaruc- tior of submarines and cruisers on large scale, giving the impression of another navy race" in progress. Con- gress thinks that a conference to deal with this aspect of the naval situa- ton should be called.
 Probably the administration feels that if there is any sincerity behind the p-otestations of the powers to linn it armaments, they should prove it by ratifying and effectively carrying out the terms of the 1922 compacts, al though it is understood that the state department has been sounding oJt the powers on the subject referred to by congress.
 Another point to be considered is that congress itself has not strictly op served the terms of the arms agree ment. Both Secretary Hughes of the state department, and Secretary Den by. of the navy department, empha- sized the fact that in orde" to man- tain effectively the ratio agreed upon, whereby the United States and Great
 
 Britain were to have navies the same size while Japan's navy was to be 6O per cent as large as those of the U. $. and England, this country should main tain its personnel at point equal to that of Great Britain. Yet while the British navy has more than one hund red thousand men, congress reduces the personnel of the American navy to Ss,O0O thus upsotting the 5-5-3 ration and reducing the strength of our own navy below that of Englandfs.
 The American experts at Wash iLgton conference. worked out the five five th-ee ration as a fair relation anc the other powers agreed to it, yet b! ctyngresslonal action our own country deliberately wcakens itself. And since such is the attitude of congress, il might be questioned whether further ncgoi iations would put this countr! at a still lalged disadvantage.