Evening star., 1929-12-01
Food Ship Immunity
Discussed by Nations
Continued From Third Page)

= ACAAA nSN'b
tary France Is by no means ready to
acquieScence for all time in the British
domination of the seas
The exploits of the German subma-
rines during the World War disclosed
weak point in the British armor even
when her fleets patroled the seas un-
opposed. The development Of aviation
during and since the war has brCught
into being another weapon besides sub
marines which could be directed against
that weak point in the British arnlor.
France desires no war with England.
But if England forces war upon her"
French military strategy will concen-
trate on the British weak point. French
submarines and French airplanes, based
upon their home ports could make 1t
an extremely hazardous business to
bring ships into British harbors, and
without a steady stream of ships bring
ing food to British harbors England's
fighting power would last but few
weeks. no matter what her victories
elsewhere.
To let food ships pass the naval lines
as hospital ships do would be to de-
prive military France of this strategic
advantage over England. Military France
is naturally reluctant thus to surrender
its outstanding advantage. 1t will
make little public exposition of its
government which opposes the Hoover
suggestion on the ground that 1t
weakens the league.
In England there is a division of
opinion on the food ship proposal as
there is on the traditional American |
doctrine of the freedom of the seas |
The big navy" group fights Stubbornly !
against any acceptance of this Ameri- |
can doctrine with its implied surrender |
of Britains historic practice OF throt- |
ting her enemys trade in time of war. |
The contention of this group Is that |
Britain should continue to maintain !
navy capable of controlling the seas in !
any emergency; then leave 1t to tnat
navy both to assure EnglandS food sup
ply and to cut of the supplies OF any
enemy susceptible to blockade by sea.
This section of British opinion has no
use for any doctrine Of the freedom OF
the seas. It would ignore. neutral rights
when necessary. And it sees no value
in a proposal to allow food ships to slip
by the vigilant watch OF British cruisers.
Shipping Interests Involved.
But there is another section of British
opinion far more numerous and prob
ably at the present time Of greater
power 1t had its first adherents among
the British shipping interests. which
felt that the traditional British doc
ated greatly to their disadvantage when
Britain was a neutral and forced them
to assume the greatest risks when
Britain was at war. They see, there
fore, some value in Americas concep-
tion of the freedom Of the seas.
An influential group in themselves,
their numbers have been increased to
include what is probably great ma
jority of the population by the realiza-
tion since the war that stubborn in
sistence on the traditional British posi-
ton would inevitably bring Britain into
conflict with the United States, and
that such a conflict had nothing in the
world to recommend it.
Out of this conviction arises the more
receptive mood in British governmental
circles, typifed by the visit of the prime
minister to this country, toward ma
val agreement Of some sort with the
United States. Thus public sentiment
In Great Britain is strongly in favor OF
a naval limitation agreement, and prob
ably would support proposal to make
8 virtue of necessity" as the London
New Statesman puts it, and surrender
the traditional British practice OF con-
trolling the seas in war time in return
for an agreement that ships bearing
food supplies should be exempt from
enemy attacks.
While there is much evidence Of this
disposition gracefully to accept the post
war distribution Of world power, there
is in England, perhaps more than any
where else. a lively appreciation of all
the practical difnculties involved In the
Hoover proposal.
Such difficulties lead the hard-bitten
Tories to raise such questions as
whether it is equitable to forbid food
blockades on the sea while permitting
them on land. Your true Tory would
rather go down shouting Britannia
rules the wavesl" than concede for a
moment she doesn't.
The more liberal elements in Eng
land however, including those at pres
ent in control of the government, are
disposed to avoid the practical difficult
ties Of the Hoover proposal, not by re-
verting to the historic effort to MAIN
tain Britain's control of the seas. but
by forging ahead in the effort to make
war itself impossible. If this is done.
it will reduce the food ships matter to
the proportions Of purely academic