davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
(Commiffee Fiu,iiug).

With respect to the energetic naval
building Of less well-to-do countries" it
ls pertinent to point out that the United
States has under construction at the
present time a larger total tonnage
than any other power
check-up on table II shows the
figures cited therein to be slightly mac
curate
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
(COmmntee Findinel

This is the only indication through
out the pamphlet of what the truce
really involves. AS previously pointed
out, most of the statement. as well ms
all the tables. except Table v. either
support or leave untouched the assump-
ton that all construction would be
stopped. This paragraph, in finally adj
mitting the facts, endeavors to give the
impression that the truce permits the
continuation OF construction ALREADY
under way merely after the defeat Of
earlier efforts to stop such construction
AS pointed out previously paragraph
10, it was never contemplated that
such construction should be abandoned
The inclusion of a series of tables
known to be obsolete by the NAVY
League at the time the statement was
issued, should have been so labeled to
avoid misleading the public,
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
May League PGniphIet).

Senator Reeds insistence that
the Navy be built up to treaty
terms made particularly pertinent
some studies as to naval building
programs that the Navy League had
then undertaken, which it pub
lished on August 20, 1881.
Committee Finding.
No comment.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
III.
Mary League Pam DhIeD

But. within five months of enter
ing the White House. President
Hoover held up the building of the
first five of the Is cruisers Congress
had Just ordered be built on a def
mite time schedule, and he did this
as a friendly gesture preparatory TO
nave conference he proposed, a
gestur chat was not commensu-
rately :opied by other prospective
participants. although. when Judged
by treaty ratios. they greatly excelled
us in under-age ships built and
building.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

These ratios are equivalent to ratio Of
auent tables. the United States TONNAGE is
considered as par stated as 100. and the
on 10
This shows. as is we'll known. that
President Hoovers delegates yielded to
the British at London in 1880 what
President Coolidge had refused to yield
to them at Geneva in 1927, namely.
that the United States put a large part
of our future cruiser tonnage in the
smalltgun type of cruiser most useful
to British ends and greatly reduce our
building Of the large-gun type better
suited to our circumstances; and at
London President Eoover's delegates
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
(Commirfee Findingl

The proposed truce woAld not widen
the gap" as is implied by the Navy
League, since it would merely maintain
the status quo. AS has been previously
explained. 1t does not prevent the
United States from catching up to the
tonnage levels of other powers by the
end of the London naval treaty period.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

remaining between now and then,
the Navy League advocated alterna-
lively more moderate program that
it drew up with the aim of COM
pleting only some of the treaty
ships while merely starting the
construction of virtually all others
before the end of the treaty, their
completion being deferred until
thereafter. The year-by-year costs
for these two programs are sum-
married. in Table III.
No comment from committee.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
68.s75.25O 58.S8I.250


Totals 81 oOs, 7o2 $50 $751; 276 $50 1886 42s 500
AS the administration, when seeking
ratification of its London treaty, had
implied that the principal purpose
thereof was to give the United States
chance to catch up-at a cost of
admittedly more than a billion dollars
it seems permissible to point out
that the Navy League, in advocating
much more moderate program than
that called for by the administration S
treaty, has acted with restraint not
supposed to be characteristic of that
mythical big navy" group which the
administration apparently delights In
holding up to public opprobrium.
(COmmittee FindingJ.
To assume that the administration
has implied that the principal purpose
of the London naval treaty was to give
the United States an opportunity to
catch up" IS erroneous. The treaty
was not dictated by the United States.
1t was voluntary agreement entered
into in order to insure common adj
vantages for the United States, Great
Britain and Japan. The preamble OF
the treaty reads in part as follows:
Desiring to prevent the dangers and
reduce the burdens inherent in COM
petitive ornaments, and
Desiring to carry forward the work
begun by the washington Naval Con-
ference and to facilitate the progress
sive realization Of general limitation
and reduction of ornaments,
Have resolved to conclude q treaty
for limitation and reduction Of naval
ermamentS-"
Innumerable public references of off,
Gals of this Government have explained
both in the HEARINGS before the Cepata
Foreign Relations Committee and to
the American people that the object
of this treaty had been to stop a race
in naval construction, without menac-
ing national security and without sacri-
ficing the recognized principle Of naval
parity between the United States and
Great Britain.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
VIII.
Mary Le0Rue PomDbIot

built and building 600 $3.50. 1925
"others would stand still while we
caught up" The importance OF af-
Committee Finding.
1t will be noticed that Table II shows
not only that the japanese fleet of I'M
derage auxiliaries, built and building,
is within IS tons of equality, as a
whole, with that of the United States,
but that the actual ratio Is l0.0-13l-
100 instead of the 10.0-l0.2-68 pro-
posed in the London naval treaty.
COMMITTEE FindingJ.
There is no basis for citing present
ratios in opposition to the London
treaty ratios as though the two were
incompatible. The London treaty pro-
videS for ratios and tonnages which
are not to be exceeded as of December
81. 1886, lie, after a lapse Of time of
more than five years. The London
treaty does not obligate the parties to
reduce naval ornaments to the pre-
scribed limits prior to that date. Ar
ticle 16, paragraph 2, Of the treaty pro-
vides:
Vessels which cause the total ton
mage in any category to exceed the
figures given in the foregoing table
shall be disposed of gradually during
the period ending on the 3lst Deem
ber 1896"
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
marily to the immunization of food
SupplieS)
COMMITTEE FindinR).

The subject matter of these para
graphs relating to the immunization of
food supplies in time of war consists
largely of expressions of Mr.. GARDENERS
personal opinion, as publically expressed
by him about year ago, and now in.
corporated in the Navy League state
ment.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
(Nduy League PGmpIlIeD.

Examination of previous naval
moves by President Hoover indicates
q condition precedent that throws
much light on his recent mandatory
order that the budget estimate IF
e401 600 900, which the Navy De-
partment had submitted for The
fiscal year ended on June 30, 1882,
be cut by s6l ,o0t 900 down to $780,
nnn 600
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XIV to xLvII.
Mary Lengue Pam phLetl.

May League Pam phIetJ.
Paragraphs IS and rs, together
with paragraphs 27-47, embodying
a personal letter dated November IA,
1880, to the New York Herald
Tribune from the president of the
Navy League, reprinted in the
pamphlet under review, relates pri-
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
(COmmifree FindinR).

The inference described as "moSt
obvious in this paragraph could only
be drawn by someone in ignorance of
the public statements made during the
discussions in the Assembly and the
Third Committee of the League of Ma
tions. in discussing before this COM
mittee the Scandinavian proposal for
an ornaments truce (Which embodied
in concrete form the general principles
OF the Grandi propoSaD, the Danish
representative-who was the author of
the Scandinavian resolution-said that
the expression not to increase the
present level OF ornaments did not
imply that work under consideration
would be stopped" An alternative pro-
posal, submitted subsequently by the
Italian delegation. specifically stated
that ships in course of construction
might on the other hand be completed"
These were the two drafts which the
committee had before 1t when Mr.. Will
son made his statement. Both of them
contemplated permitting the completion
OF construction under way, the first by
an unchallenged explanation of its
author the second by its specific terms.
There was thus no occasion for Mr.
Wilson to make further reference to a
matter which was already understood.
Moreover, 1t should have been obvious
W dHyOHe FAMILIAR WIN the trend OF
recent naval discussions and who has
noted the large tonnage under construc-
ton by number of powers that an
ornaments truce providing for cessation
OF work on ships already building would
not have found general approval.
Finally, 1t would have been unusual
procedure on the part of the United
States to have insisted on the right to
lay down certain destroyerS already
contracted for, while at the same time
abandoning work in progress.
The American Government was never
called upon to consider abandonment
OF construction already begun and
would in no case have agreed to con-
sider any proposal providing for such
abandonment. In his note of october
20, 1881, to the Secretary General of
the League of Nations, accepting the
proposed ornaments truce, the Score
tary of State said
IT Is the understanding Of this Gov
eminent that the proposed truce should
not apply to construction which had
oegun or for which contracts had been
let prior 10 its entry into force"
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
xLvIII and XIX.
Macy League Pamphlet.


1t would be difficult to express too
much regret that the most humani-
tartan of pacific intentions had led
President Hoover into exhibiting the
abysmal ignorance of why navies are
maintained and of how they are used
to accomplish their major mission
that his proposal to immunize sea-
borne food supplies displayed to
those, here and abroad, who are in
timately conversant with maritime
matters. For acceptance of his sug-
gestion would have worked not only
Numerically counter to the inter-,
ests and weight of the United States
in world affairs, but, in effect, would
have made for bigger and bloodier
wars. And yet such is the psychol-
ogy that is not only controlling our
internal naval policy but debating
its external subordination to those
of foreign naval powers.
1t has been necessary, however, to
say what has been said above If we
are to have a real appreciation Of
the impelling motives back of Presi-
dent Hoover's efforts, at every turn,
to restrict, to reduce and to starve
the United States Navy-under the
present plea of budget limitation on
which we may have further cause
to comment.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XVII.
mary League PdmphleD.

The most obvious inference from
Mr.. Wilson'S statement is that.
somewhat as President Hoover had
held up the building of five of our
large-gun cruisers in 1929, so he in
tended specifically to stop the con-
Struction at least of the seven We
now have on the ways and, possibly,
what little more building we have in
hand. excepting the only exemption
specified, namely five destroyers
about to be laid down. That is to
say that, through Mr.. Wilson, he
proposed Ito forego our treaty
rights" to carry on the building OF
$1,000 tons of naval vessels in order
to create "a psychological condition
propitiouS for the conference" on
disarmament at Geneva but, at the
same time. he proposed to start
building $500 tons of destroyers
lin connection with a general pro-
gram of unemployment relief"
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

Thus the three cruisers in question did
not have to be laid down before June
so, 1880.
These cruisers, as well as the other
two cruisers constituting the first
five cruisers OF the 'l5-cruiSeI
bill" were all laid down prior to
that date Two further cruisers were
subsequently laid down. bringing the
total now under construction to seven
Eight l0.000-ton cruisers have been
completed. We thus have Is such cruis-
ers built or building. No further cruts-
ers of this type could. under the Lon
don naval treaty. be laid down before
January l, 1888, in any event.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
fGourmiitee Findingl.

These paragraphs contain no state
ments of fact, but consist solely Of
general opinions and conclusions.
The committee finds that in its en-
tirety Mr.. GARDENERS statement contains
many inaccuracies, false assertions and
erroneous conclusions, and that his
assumption as to the Presidents atti-
tude toward the Navy is wholly un-
warranted.
Done at Washington, D. c., this
sixth day of November, 1881.
JOHN HAYS HAMMOND,
Chairman;
HUGH RODMAN.
ELIOT WADSWORTH,
WILLIAM r. CASTLE, Jr.,
ERNEST LEE JAHNCKE,
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XIII.
Navy League Pamphlet.)

NN"Vy League THHpHEeSsT
Here, again, we find that propos-
ais voiced through the League Of
Nations would initiate particularly
against the United States while es-
pecially favoring the British and
japanese. For the initial ratio of
1O-13.5-10.5 would be changed to
lO-l47-l1.9. thus widening the gap
between our fleet of auxiliaries and
the treaty ratio of 10-102-6.8 and
yielding to the British and Japanese
an average gain of IL per cent over
the United States.
tSee comment on preceding para
graph)
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XIV.
(NaUy League PnmDhLeD.

In view of Franco-Italian rivalry.
such a holiday would be materially
IN Italys interest; for with much
more money at her command France
Is building more than twice the
naval tonnage that Italy is. But
when Signor Grandi expressed SEEM
lngly surprised delight that his sug-
geStion had so promptly received the
support Of the American admins
tration, he appeared to be over
playing his part to those who re-
called not only the premature report
OF last Summer as to President Hoo
ver's plan for a naval holiday, but
also that Secretary Stimson had
been in conference with Signors
Mussolini and Grandi between that
premature report and Signor Grandi's
move at Geneva. And their in
ference as to the real authorship Of
the Grandi proposal was measurably
confirmed when, on the 23d OF Sep
TENDER. the State Department issued
The text of a statement made that
day by its representative, Mr.. Hugh
II. Wilson, in the League of Nations
meeting at Geneva,
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

tain cruiser levels" but that "the
present cruiser level of the United
States is considerably below the
figures provided for in the London
agreement. Thus any undertaking
on our part not to augment existing
naval strength for year, causes US,
and say it frankly, an embarrass-
ment and dislocation of cnostruc-
ton plans. Nevertheless" he con-
tinued, I'VE regard the general
question of disarmament as so i'm
portant and the necessity of Great
ing a psychological condition propi-
tiouS for the conference as so ur-
gent. that we are willing to forego
our treaty rights in this respect"
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
COMMITTEE Finding).

France Is not building more than
twice as much naval tonnage as Italy.
Recent figures (as of october l, 193D
show that France is building at the
present time 137,424 tons, while Italy
is building 1851.
The inference that the United States
suggested the Grand proposal is false.
The Italian government first public
suggestion of a truce was made prior
to the Secretarys first conversation
with the head of the Italian govern
ment.
Prior to the announcement of the
Italian proposal, which appeared in the
press of July 9, 1880, before Mr.. Slim
son arrived in Rome, no suggestions for
an ornaments truce had been proposed
by this Government nor had any ex-
change of views taken place between
the United States and Italy in respect
to truce.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

May League P0mDhIetI

Under date of October Z. 1891.
the Navy League published its
analysis of the actual and relative
results to be expected from the nro-
posal made by the League of Ma
lions What seems to be the most
likely results are summarized Ina
Table v.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

no sound foundation, although it is
made so to appear in the pamphlet
under discussion.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
Mary League PnmphIeD.

The Presidents initiative for
conference led to his conversations
at the Rapidan with the British
prime minister which, admittedly.
reached agreements that have never
been divulged in their entirety;
which suggests why the admins
tration refused to allow even an
executive session of the Senate
Committee en- Foreign Relations to
see the full record of its negotia-
tons and possible commitments
preparatory to the London Naval
Conference of 1880.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XXI.
May League PamDh

The latter seems to have over
taken the scheme to stop all naval
building during 1882. for there
emerged from the fog of HenerAIities
at Geneva a definite invitation IN
September 30, not to stop all naval
building but merely that no new
keels should be laid down during
the IL months beginning on Noveme
Der l. 1881.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

mary League PGmphlef).
RESULTS OF NAVAL HOLIDAY THAT
ING DURING 1892.
United British Japanese
States. Empire. Empire.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
COMMITTEE FindingJ.

The ratios described have previously
been shown to be incorrect and in
the course of pointing out these in
accuracies a more accurate picture of
the relationship between the fleets has
been portrayed.
1t is stated that the Navy League
had prepared an analysis of the eff
fects of the truce. but this again has
already been demonstrated to have been
incorrect. The facts on which correct
assertion might have been based were
easily ascertainable from public delib-
erations and documents.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
Mary League Pam phIef).


AS such naval holiday as PreSi-
dent Hoover seemed to favor. If We
may judge from Mr.. wilson's state
ment. would change the initial
American British japanese ratios
for auxiliaries from 10.0-14.8-1l.2
to l0.0-17.1-13.4, thus widening
the gap in the ratios and yielding
the British and japanese an aver
age gain Of IT'S per cent over the
United States in these respects, 1t
appeared inconceivable that any
informed American official could
approve of a naval holiday that
would thus result. But an OBJ
vious, although, as we shall see
anon, perhaps not the basic ex-
PLANTATION would be that President
Hoover, in spite of his partiality
to fact finding commissions, had
not taken the precaution to have
such an analysis made as was
easily done entirely within the
Navy League in less than a hun
dIed man-hours of work. Yet 1t is
natural to avoid the finding and the
facing of facts that may refute
ones fancies, although lodging them
may invite refutation and defeat,
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XVIII.
Macy League PamphleD.


While, as Mr.. Wilson admitted the
administration had not had time
presumably between President Hoo,
Vers prematurely reported concen-
tlon or naval holiday earlv last
Summer and the % September Ito
survey this problem in so far asst re-
lateS to the Navy with that careful
scrutiny which would enable us N
give nnal approval at this moment
10 any particular FORM" the Navy
league found ample time between
tne ~ September. when Senior
Hranoi nrSt voiced his proposal, and
tiie EoCn Oh Ihat same month to make
q conclusive analysis of the actual
and relative effects of a naval holt
gay tnat would stop all building dur
ing 1882. The American British
japanese results of this, published
uhoer cate OF the rs September. 1881.
are here shown in Table w.
COMMITTEE Finding).
The inference that the American
Government had time to study the oues-
tlon OF naval holiday since early last
summer Is based on the incorrect as
SUMPTION mace In paragraph Is (see
comments on this paragraph) that this
government was already considering
such holiday when the Secretary of
State went to Europe. While subse-
quent to Mr.. Mussolini's first yoicing
OF the general idea of a naval holiday.
this Government naturally made various
analytical studies as to the possibilities
ana consequences Of a holiday. it had
before 1t no concrete proposal prior to
the introduction in the Third Commit
tee of the Scandinavian resolution on
September II. Mr.. Grandi's original
suggestion. made before the Assembly
ON September 8. was too vague and
general to constitute q definite pro-
poSal on which technical studies could
De based. 1t was not possible for the
american Government to comment in
detail on the Grandi proposal, owing to
lack OF details as to how these HOLIDAYS
were to be carried out. Not until Sep
tember % did the Italian delegation in
troduce concrete proposal in the form
OF an alternative to the Scandinavian
resolution. Mr.. Wilson's statement was
made on the following day. September
70. The final draft, which differed ma
terially from earlier drafts, was not
adopted by the Assembly until Septeno-
Der 20. All these drafts Including a,
number Of notifications studied ia the
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08

VT Stsi FAS GALA T Hak
Esb g gSS$EESH S RSStEsaR +
Linz. s'Rstssss. E Empire i EnPESs.
building:
Nov Nov l. be- s ssssS s ssss tsssss
Decreases -. 6447O 1880 l4.ss4
tas. built and
Nov Nov i 1s 5ssl' s sss s slss 1879 1879
Decreases =. ssG SAG $50
iSsi -: 1000 ls.ss 1857
1882 .....'.... 100 H7 1l.s
10 P erssnsssss OF W 40. =.
kAlhS' wv 800 1870
sPectiyely, to the corresponding ratios as
over the United States average II per cent
The Navy League has taken what
steps are within its power to make
known its analysis of the League OF
Nations design for a holiday in naval
building not only to President Hoover
but to every member of his cabinet, ia
every member of Congress and to the
press of the country. 1t may be
assumed, therefore, that the facts are
known. 1t follows that If President
Hoover's administration accepts the
proposal made by the League of Nations
1t does so knowing that its action
specifically serves British and japanese
interests to the prejudice of analogous
interests of the United States, although
the responsibility of the President is
primarily to and for the United States
But, as suggested above, we should look
deeper than lack of knowledge of the
facts for an understanding of the
Presidents policy as to the Navy.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
XIV.
XIV.
Navy LeaRue Pamnhlet.l

RESULTS OF A NAVAL HOLIDAY THAT
N WOULD BAH TIE ,LA LAYING or IA! ANY
THE TONNAGE Now APPROPRIATED
FOR. BETWEEN NOVEMBER l, 1881.
AND NOVEMBER |, 1892
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-08
Navy League PGmDhIetJ
United British japanese
states, Empire Empire

LONDON NAVAL TREATY TONNAGE
QUOTAS FOR AUXILIARY TYPES