The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-12-06

S now going on in London.
He spoke at luncheon ten
dered him by the Association
of American Correspondents.
1t was the first such public
announcement of American
naval policy made since the
three : power conversations
started.
Although Mr.. Davis spoke in
formally and on his own RESPONSE
bility, there was little doubt that
his remarks had the full approval
of President Roosevelt.
1t was evident also that his re-
marks were directed to Japan. He
took occasion to answer specifically
the pricipal argument of the jap
anese.
Stands on Treaties.
The American naval position is
based squarely upon the Washington
and London naval treaties, Mr..
Davis said. These treaties provide
for Equality of security" Not ex-
act equality of ornaments. No other
basis for an agreement for naval
limitation would be satisfactory to
the United States, he indicated.
The object of the washington con-
ference, he said, was to put an end
to a ruinous naval race that was
impeding recovery from the World
War and to establish sound basis
for peace in the Pacific and the Far
East
1T was at that time recognized
and admitted by tina representatives
of Great Britain, Japan and the
United States-the three naval pow
ers most directly concerned-that it
was not possible to reach agreement
through an academic discussion of
what each country considered its
needs to be or what it required to
satisfy national pride >. The
priciple adopted was that of equal
lty Of security
Must Alter Security
Mr.. Davis said this was the first
successful effort ever made to re-
duce and limit navies.
He declared that any basic alter
alton in the system Setup by the
Washington treaty must of neces-
sity alter the security thus estab-
lished.
Abandonment now of the prin-
ciples involved would lead to con-
ditions of insecurity, or interna-
tional suspicion, and of costly COM
petition, with no real advantage to
any nation he warned.
Mr.. Davis cited the voluntary sac
rifices in naval tonnage made by
the UniteG States at the Washing
ton conference, and limited that the
United States could attain and
maintain naval supremacy in any
building race, if it chose.
Calls Conference Success
"The Washington conference was
a success" he said, because the ma
tions represented there approached
in a broad and practical way the
problems that confronted them. No
nation attempted to impose its will
on the others, but each was willing
to contribute something substantial
to the achievement to the ends de-
sired"
He answered the plea that
Japan's national pride demands
that she be accorded naval equality
with Britain ana the United States.
He asserted that japanese national
pride had been respected at the
Washington conference.
The United States does not be-
lieve and does not contend that any
nation should against it's will enter
into or renew a treaty the p-ovi-
sions of which it does not consider.
advantageous to itself or beneficial
to the world in general" he said.
1T would, however, greatly regret
and regard as most unfortunate the
destruction of this system of naval
limitation which has proved gener-
ally beneficial and which has not
jeopardized the security of any ma
ton. We do not question, in fact We
affirm the inherent right of any
ana every power to equality Of Sc
curity. This, I am sure, we have
made abunda-.tly plain.
The essence of the Washington
treaty system was equality of Sc
curly under conditions of co-opera-
ton the naval treaty was the
work of five principal naval powers,
Japan. Great Britain. France, Italy
and the United states. None of
these could have accepted and
agreed to the provisions of that
treaty had it felt that its national
security was thereby menaced or