Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-04-23
Safety Clause in Naval Pact
Subject of Varying Comment

Weak points and ADVANTAGES in the
safeguarding clause of the naval treaty.
as prepared by the powers at London.
are set forth In the course Of the debate
that has followed the announcement of
the adoption of the principle. There
are differences of opinion as to whether
the provision for naval expansion in an
emergency tends to weaken the force of
the treaty as means of arms limita-
ton.
Americans should not be disturbed
Ior moment, says the Richmond
NewS-Leader, because Britain insists
that safeguarding clause be added
clause permitting her to reassemble the
conference and to seek revision in case
the naval construction of any non-sig-
natory power threatens her position.
The United States would have precisely
the same rights in like circumstances
There Is an excellent precedent for such
safeguarding clause. It Is to be found
IN Article XXI Of the five-power WASH
ington treaty Of 1922 There is
no more to fear from a safeguarding
clause In 1880 than there was in 1922"
=
The safety proviso impresSes the New
Orleans Times icayline as one that
seems necessary with conditions as
they are" though that paper recog-
n1zes that sit constitutes somewhat
lronlc commentary upon existing condi.
tons" The New Orleans paper con-
cludeS that ut is to be hoped that the
safeguard viii never have to be invoked,
put the fact Of its necessity testifies
tnat the goal Of disarmament, and even
mat OF substantial armament reduction,
may yet be great way or"
If, under the conditions" in The
opinion Of the New York Evening Post
the London treaty cannot excite great
enthusiasm, there Is none the less every
reason why 1t should be ratified as expe-
ditiouSly as possible" The Post denies
that the clause Gin any way preiudices
our interests" Declaring that it is athe
treaty's most vulnerable point" It argues
tnat this provision can be defended
only on the ground Of its absolute
necessity, but in view Of the attitude Of
debate in the Senate can change. this
factor in the situation becomes an IN
anSwerable argument"
49, -
ut provides against an emergency
which may not arise" AYERS the Detroit
Free Press, land which, If IL sho,ilG
arise, Will not necessarily destroy the
naval ratios Of the signatories.
lt Is difficult to see how any treaty
nmltlng naval armament could be
framed without 1t as long as powerful
meets remained outside the pact" The
chicago Daily News holds that "the
outstanding achievement of the confer
ence u deemed to be the clearing away
Of naval rivalry among the greatest
three naval powers" The Daily News
concludes: 1.-THE one remaining Source
OF anxiety Is Frances apparent deter
mlnation to go on building warships.
That may inspire Italy to do the same.
Thus Great Britain soon may insist on
casting of the limitations Of the three
power treaty in order that the tradi-
tional British two-navy standard APP
Piled to other European powers may be
maintained"
Studying the practical results if there
should be any emergency arising In the
future, the Dayton Daily News argues:
The extra dollar which France spends
for fighting boats will be matched by
three dollars spent by the other powers
-four dollars, If we include italy
France, OF course, Is relatively no
stronger than before. 1t might as well
have saved its cash. AS that would save
also the cash OF all the rest of us, we
can confidently predict that before
France starts the round it will be sub
Ject to plenty Of pressure on the part
of the rest Of Us"
y
Observing that the japanese dele
gates "were not wholly satisfied with
the safeguarding clause" the Kalamazoo
Gazette records that they do feel that
1t is loophole which might prove dam
gerously tempting" conceding that
there Is admittedly something to be
said for the Japanese view of the mat |
ter" The Raleigh News and Observer