Evening star., 1936-03-27
Rate by Mail-PayabIe in Advance.
All Other States and Canada.
Member OF the Associated Press.
The Naval Treaty.

From the moment Japan refused to
abandon her claim to parity with Great
Britain and the United States all pos
sibility Of further naval limitation, on
the basis of expiring treaties, virtually
vanished. Under the circumstances, the
agreement just signed by Great Britain,
the United States and France represents
the maximum attainable at this time.
The results are disappointing, but it is
distinctly a case of half loaf being
better than no bread. The treaty pre-
serves the principle of limitation and
provides basis for reaching it in future
under more favorable conditions. Japan
took no part in negotiating the pact be-
cause she quit the conference when her
parity demands were denied. Italy re-
fused to sign because of League sane
tions and the continued presence of the
British fleet in the Mediterranean.
AS the pact excludes ''quantitative"
limitation, each power is now at liberty
to build as many warships as it pleases.
But Great Britain and the United States
exchange pledges that they will pre-
serve parity as between their own fleets
and engage in no competitive construc-
ton. That agreement between the two
English shooting" navies is important
and gratifying in high degree. Its sig
nifcance will be duly appreciated in
other quarters.
The treaty provides that capital ships
will continue to be limited to $4,000 tons
"a condition On which the United States
has always insisted. Guns on these
ships are limited to 14-inch weapons, but
may be of 16-inch caliber if any other
naval power fails to agree to the smaller
size. Aircraft carriers will not exceed
5000 tons, instead of 27,500 tons, as at
present. Cruisers are restricted to 5000
tons, and a Six-year holiday is estab-
aished in construction Of 10,000-ton
cruisers. Nothing in the agreement in
terferes with plans to build the United
States Navy up to treaty strength by
2942. Escape clauses" permit suspen-
sion of treaty obligations in case Of war
or If some non-signatory power builds
to a point imperiling the security Of a
treaty nation. Japan and Italy may
sign at any time. Germany and Soviet
Russia are also at liberty to participate.
In providing for regular exchange Of
building plans between the treaty pow
ers, the surprise" element Is effectually
removed, and, with it, one of the funda-
mental causes Of naval rivalry.
Many and vital as the shortcomings
of this purely qualitative" limitation
treaty are, 1t is the utmost that could be
achieved amid what the chief American
delegate at London, Ambassador Nor
man H. Davis, described as these days
OF profound economic, political and mil
itary disturbance" Mr.. Davis terms 1t
'the foundation of new structure" He
declares 1T will serve as q bridge to
future treaties OF more far-reaching
scope and the structure of international
understanding will not have been de-
stroyed."
Meantime, with the consciousness Of
having consistently advocated genuine
naval Limitation in line with the lead it
gave in 1922, it becomes the United
States duty resolutely to adhere to its
program Of completing treaty fleet and
to the policy of maintaining a defense
at sea at all times commensurate with
the Nations needs.