The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1930-07-07

President Hoover's message
to the senate, urging ratifca-
ton of the London nGval
treaty, folLo1OS::
In requesting the senate to con-
vene in session for the special pur-
pose of dealing with the treaty fol
the limitation and reduction OF
naval armament signed at London
April %, 1880, it is desirable that
I should present my views upon it
This is especially necessary because
Of misinformation and miSrepresen-
tation which has been widespread
by those who in reality are opposed
to all limitation and reduction in
naval arms.
We naturally must expect op-
position from those groups who be-
lieve in unrestricted military
strength as an objective of the
American nation. Indeed, we
find the same type of minds in
Great Britain and Japan, In
parallel opposition to this treaty.
Nevertheless, I am convinced that
the overwhelming majority of the
American people are opposed to the
conception of these groups.
Our people believe that military
strength should be held in conform
ity with the sole purpose of national
defense. They earnestly desire real
progress in limitation and reduction
of naval arms of the world, and
their aspiration is for abolition OF
competition in the building of arms
as a step toward world peace. Such
result can be obtained in no other
way than by international agree
ment.
The present treaty is one which
holds these safeguards and ad-
vances these ideals. It's ratification
is in the interest of the United
States. It is fair to the other par
ticipating nations. 1t promotes the
cause of good relations.
Il 49,
TINE only alternative to this
l. treaty is the competitive building
of navies with all its flow of sus-
picion, hate, ill-will and ultimate
disaster. History supports those
who hold to agreement as the path
to peace.
Every naval limitation treaty with
which We are familiar, from the
Rush Bagot agreement of 1917, lim-
iting vessels Of war on the Great
Lakes, to the Washington arms
treaty of 1921, has resulted in q
marked growth Of good will and
confidence between the parties to 1t
1t is folly to think that because
We are the richest nation in the
world we can outbuild all other
countries. Other nations will make
any sacrifice to maintain their in
struments of defense against us, and
We eventually shall reap in their
hostility and i'll will the full meas
ure of the additional burden which
we may thus impose upon them.
The very entry of the United
States into such courses as this
would invite the consolidation OF
the rest of the world against us and
bring our peace and independence
into jeopardy. We have only to look
at the state of Europe in 1914 to find
ample evidence of the futility and
danger of competition in arms.
q
1T will be remembered that in re-
l. spouse to recommendations from
the senate a conference between the
United States, Great Britain and
Japan, for limitation of those cate
gories of naval arms not covered by
the Washington treaty of 1921, was
held at Geneva in 1927. That con-
ference failed because the United
States could not agree to the large
size of fleets demanded by other
governments
The standards set up at that time
would have. required an ultimate
feet of about 100000 tons for the
United States. AS against this, the
total United States fleet set out
under this treaty will be about l.
10000 tons.
Defense IS the primary function
of government, and therefore our
first concern in examination of any
act of this character is the test of
its adequacy in defense. No critic
has yet asserted that with the
navies provided in this agreement
together with our army, our aerial
defense and our national resources,
we can not defend ourselves, and
certainly we want no military estab-
lishment for the purpose Of DONNA
ton of other nations
Our naval defense position under
this treaty is the more clear if we
examine our present naval strength
in comparison to the present
strength of the other nations, a ID
then examine the Improvements in
this proportion which will result
from this treaty.
This Improvement arises from the
anticipation Of parity in battleships
to be reached ten years hence I'M
der the Washington arms treaty
and the fact tina other nations
have been building in the classes of
ships not limited by that treaty,
while we, until lately, Jagged be-
hind.
n
0N the first of January last, the
~ total naval tonnage, disregard
ing paper fleets, and taking only
those ships actually built and build
ing, was, for the United States
1,18o 900 tons; for the British empire
1882, 900 tons; for Japan. 768,00C
tons. That is, if the United States
navy to be taken as 100, then the
British navy equals 1l3 and the
japanese navy IS.
Under this treaty the United
States will have 1923 900 tons,
Great Britain ISL 900 tons and ia
pan 114,O00 tons, or a ration of 10C
for the United States to 1924 fo1
Great Britain and $50 for Japan.
The slightly larger tonnage ratio
mentioned for Great Britain is due
to the fact that her cruiser feet