Evening star., 1934-12-18

A majority Of newspaper observers
are convinced that the present unset
tied state of world affairs leaves the
United States with no other alterna-
tive than to build up her Navy at
least to treaty strength. At the same
time they deplore the thought of a
world armamett race and hope that
some solution of the problem will be
found.
There is no implication that the
mere collapse Of the present CONVERSE
tions will lead to a race In arma-
ments," comments the New York Sun,
'for the United States is prepared to
go ahead on the basis of the WASH
ington and London treaties as at pres
ent. until other powers are more in
the mood for reduction in accordance
with those treaties" The Atlanta Con-
stitution agrees that there is nothing
in the situation that threatens the
launching of another armament race. !"
On the other hand, the Portsmouth
(Ohio) Times says that there prob
ably will be naval race" adding that
sit will be vigorously contested and
very expensive"
To the Stamford (Conn.) Advocate,
however, it seems that "the mood of
our country cannot be interpreted as
favorable to a race in ornaments"
This paper adds: "Only Japan and
Great Britain have naval strength suf-
f1cient to cause us alarm, and our Navy
need not be nearly so large, as 1t is
to do such policing jobs as are re-
garded necessary for the maintenance
Of peaceful conditions among the Car
ibbean countries-a duty we seem to
have imposed upon ourselves. A gen.
eral agreement to Japan's demand for
parity. with large reductions among
all the powers. might from all stand
points be an excellent proposition for
the disarmament negotiators to enter
tain"
ut Is easier to build navies than to
pay for them," points out the New
York World Telegram. at is easier
to start an armament race than to
win or stop it. 1t is easier to loose
suspicion than to turn it back again
into good will" The Dayton (Ohio)
Journal takes the position that mo
further general reduction being in
sight, the United States cannot afford
to neglect the requirements of its first
line of national defense"
Elaborating upon this point. the
New York Times declares: There
can be no doubt of the Presidents
sincerity in striving to limit arma-
ments. He has made q proposal of
horizontal reduction in naval
strength. The bills passed by Con-
gress for additional construction
always authorized q suspension by the
President If he is able to report an
international agreement for limita-
ton Of arms. But If Japan discards
the agreed ratios for naval strength,
the United States will be forced to
reconsider its entire program and to
create Navy adequate for national
defense in all circumstances.
The Scranton Times asserts that "a
big Navy, so long as we have a small
standing Army. viii be reinsurance
to the people" while the Philadelphia
Inquirer holds that "a strong Navy is
essential. not for aggression, but for
the preservation Of peace" and the
Charleston Is. c. Evening Post calls
attention to the fact that "it is the
Navy which must be ready always to
meet the enemy first, and the Navy
must be maintained at all times on an
emergency basis, capable Of meeting
any emergency at moments notice,
since that Is how emergencies often
develop"
The Philadelphia Bulletin points out
that "a big Navy means big money
from the Federal Treasury" It adds:
"The financial stake that the tax
payer has in the continuance of