New Britain herald., 1930-01-18
3.--AnelO- American Parity
 fBy Byron PriCc)

Among all of the history making events which usher in the London conference. one central element con- tinucs 10 hold the unfailing attention of world diplomacy.
 It is the spectacle Of the two greatest sea powers. agreed or equality as between themselves. and standing together as joint sponsors of 8 new crusade 10 reduce arma- ments on the sea.
 For a century and half the United States and Great Britain hay" eyed each other inquirinGly across the Atlantic.
 Their Quarrcls over the laws Of the scaways have filled bulgin2 chapter of diplomatic protest and rctort and oncc-in l812-- brought them into armed conflict. Years ago they became the leaders in the race for world naval supremacy.
 In 1921. at the Washington con- ference. they agreed upon equality between themselves as to battleships the largest type of warcraft-und airplane carriers.
 In 1927. at Geneva. they disagreed pointedly over an equality in small CT vessels.
 In 1929. President Hoover and Prime Minister Macdonald definitely committed their respective countries 10 the principle that the two greatest uavies should be made as nearly equal as may be possible.
 It is for the conference which meets in London January ; to make practical application of that condi- ton of equality, 10 which diplomacy has attached the name of parity"
 In theory, parity means the exact pairing off of the two navics. ship for ship, gun for gun. In practice that cannot be done.
 The American navy. for instance, with it's bases scattered far apart wants to build large cruisers. The British navy wants smaller ones. How shall large and small cruisers, with differing guns, of different age and design and speed, be balanced off one against the other?
 It is useless for the layman to i'll his mind with the technical olc- ments and the formulae Of higher mathematics which must enter into the answer to this question.
 Even the naval experts arc having trouble providing the solution, az they will be asked 10 do at London. There is precisely tho same differ cncc between them over the rcla- is between automobile manutactur- CTS over which type of car is best for the average driver.
 To compare two fleets scientifically is like determining which is better provided for, the man who owns an old siN-cylinder coupe and a new four cylinder touring car, or his neighbor. with an old eight-cylindCf sedan and a new motorcycle.
 Nor have the naval experts any trade manual, like that of the auto mobile dealer, to guide them, They still are seeking d 'yardsticl' which will enable them to lump together and measure accurately such clc- mcnts as size. speed, gun capacity, and a dozen besides.
 Tn the main. the difficulty arises only as 10 cruisers. The other types Of ships are not of great concern as between the two countries. But the British have been unable to see why the United States needs so many Of the biggest type, 10000 ton cruisers. with their inch guns. So far as the practical application of parity goes, this is the major unsettled question.
 Of course, in the end. the whole problem must be solved by diplo- matic compromise. rather than by mathematics, for parity in practical application can be no more than a relative term.
 Even if the two navics themselves were exactly equal. there still would remain the question of the relative military value of naval bases, and the potentialitics oC arminS mcr- chantmcu in time of war,
 Despite it's complexities. there is optimism in both Washington and London over the question of parity. At this writing it is. perhaps. the one major project Of the conference which appears nearest solution.