New Britain herald., 1927-02-10
COOLIDGE URGES
 ARMS LIMITATION
(Continued From First Page)

memorandum suggesting that they empower their delegates at the forthcoming meeting of the prepara- tory commission for the disarma- ment conference at Geneva to nego- tiate and conclude at an early date an agreement further limiting naval armament, supplementing the Wash ington treaty on that subject, and covering the classes of vessels not covered. by that treaty. l transmit herewith. for the information of the congress, a copy of this mem- orandum.
 I wish to inform the congress of the considerations which have moved me to take this action.
 Dangerous Competition
 The support of all measures look ing 10 the preservation of the peace of the world has been long estab- ished as a fundamental policy of his government. The American government and people are con- vinced that competitive armaments constitute one of the most danger ous contributing causes of interna- tional suspicion and discord and are calculated eventually to lead to war. A recognition of this fact and desire as far as possible to remove this danger led the American gov ernment In 1921 to call the Wash ington conference.
 |, s. Gave Up Program
 At that time we were engaged In a great building program which, upon it's completion, would have given us first place on the sea. We felt then, however, and feel now, that the policy we then advocated that of deliberate self-denial and limitation of naval armament by the great naval powers-promised the attainment of at least one guarantee of peace, an end worthy of mutual adjustment and concession.
 At the Washington conference we found the other nations animated with the same desire as ourselves to remove naval competition from the list of possible causes of interna- tional discord. Unfortunately, how ever, 1t was not possible to reach agreements at Washington covering all classes of naval ships. The Wash ington treaty provided specific ton- mage limitation upon capital ships and aircraft carriers, with certain restrictions as to size and maximum caliber of guns for other vessels. Every nation has been at complete liberty to build any number of cruisers, destroyers and submarines. Only size and armament of cruisers were limited. The signatories of the Washington treaty have fulfilled their obligations faithfully and there can be no doubt that that treaty constitutes an outstanding success in its operation.
 Hope of U. s.
 It has been the hope of the Ameri- can government, constantly express cd by the congress since the Wash ington conference, that a favorable opportunity might present itself to complete the work begun here by the conclusion of further agreements covering cruisers, destroyers and submarines. The desirability of such an agreement has been apparent, since it was only to be expected that the spirit of competition, stifled as re- gards capital ships and aircraft car riers by the Washington treaty. would, sooner or later. show itself with regard to the other vessels not limited under the treaty. Actually, I do not believe that competitive build ing of these classes of ships has be- gun. Nevertheless, far-reaching building programs have been laid down by certain powers, and there has appeared in our own country, as well as abroad. a sentiment urging naval construction on the ground that such construction is taking place elsewhere. In such sentiments lies the germ of renewed naval com petition.
 I am sure that all governments and all peoples would choose sys- tenn of naval limitation in preference to consciously reverting to competi- tive building. Therefore, in the hope of bringing about an opportunity for discussion among the principal naval loHtlo lo doNti Ittlll " ilStlltl ldl Illtl limitation is practicable, I have sug- gested to them that negotiations on this subject should begin as soon as possible
 Time Is Opportune
 The moment seems particularly opportune to try to secure further limitation of armament in accord u,ifI 1,,i1 pf | a congress. The earnest desire of the nations of the world to relieve themselves in as great a measure as possible of the burden of arma- ments and to avoid the dangers or competition has been shown by he establishment of the prepara- tory commission for the disarma. ment conference, which met in Geneva last May and which in continuing it's work with view to preparing the agenda for final general conference. For more than six months, representatives of a score or more of nations have cx- amined from ali points of view the problem Of the reduction and limi- tatlon Of arm4ments. In these dis cussions 1t was brought out very clearly that a number Of nations felt that land, sea and air arma- ments were er-dependent anI that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to agree upon the limi- tation of one type of armament without simultaneously limiting tho other types.
 The consequence to be feared i4 that a deadlock will be reached, should even partial progre ss in tie reduction of armaments be condi- toned upon the acceptance O. some universal plan covering land sea and air forces together.
 Deadlock Exists Now
 IT the prospective deadlock can