Evening Star Newspaper, December 25, 1921, Page 3

THE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGTON; D. C., DECEMBER .25 1921—PART 1. FULL TEXT OF ENVOYS’ VIEWS ON SUBMARINES The official statements issued at the close of the feurth and ‘fifth joint meetings of the committee on limi- tation of armament and the subcom- mittee on naval limitation, follow: Fourth Joint Meecting. The fourth joint meeting of the committee on limitation of armament and the subcommittee on naval limi- tation was held in the Pan American® Union building at 11 a.m., December 24, 1921. Continuing the discussion of the abolition of the submarine, Mr. Sarraut safd: “Our eminent and venerated col- Yleague, Mr. Balfour, replying yester- day to Admiral de Bons statement Which. in my opinion, was so substan- tial and convincing, gave us a new opportunity for respeeting the elo- quence and the emotion of the terms | which a mind hke his always So casily finds to express the inspira- | tions of his thought. L thank him. personaily, for having given me that rare pleasure in which the regret one feels at meeting opposition immedi- ately gives way to admiration for one’s adversary. 1 regret the use of such a word as adversary, which has a displeasing sound as it comes to ¢ ears; for, as a matter of fact, the impuise of my thought, as I rise to reply to Mr. Balfour, is to tl k of the last words of his speech and to approve with all my heart and all my reason of the dignily and the serenity with which Mr. Balfour looks for- ward to the future destiny of his great country. On this point he Knows how completely I share his; faith and his conviction. My country, more than any other—Mr. Balfour knows this-—desires for Great Britain the continuation of the power and &, security which France regards as one of thé essential peace of the world #nd of the fu- ture of civilization. France would be the last to forget how greatly the heroism and the tenaocity of her mighty ally contributed "to bring about the final decision which saved the liber'y of mankind: and in the effort thus made by Bngland ~we know also what part was played by this splendid British navy which working with the French navy, did so_much to make victory certain. “I wish to bear these sentiments in mind in replying to Mr. Balfour and particularly to the argument “ad hominam.” which he addressed to France, as to Italy with the object of demonstrating the danger that might be created by the position taken on If 1 rightly the submarine question. If I rigl understood. Mr. Balfour said: “Be- ware, you may be the first victims of your attitude. land has been enabled to do for you with the aid of its navy: this help ran great risk of heing impaired by the action of the German submarines. Let us suppose that the situation at the time of the last war should recu; as has been suggested by Mr. Brian: suppose that the former allies (as Mr. Balfour said he hoped the: would ‘do); the efliciency of their help might be impaired by the re-! sumption of that submarine campaign which the attitude of France would have helped to render possible by its unwillingness to abolish the sub- marines. Uses Balfour's Argumen “Such, indeed. is Mr. Balfour's 1 of reasoning: I believe that I not understated it and that I have exactly reproduced I might re- mark that in reality the danger con- templated by M. Briand is the same as that which Mr. Balfour himself has called ‘the very great insecurity from the land side.” But I agree also with him that the peril may extend to the sea, and far from putting aside this supposition, T hasten to accept it because it will still further strengthen our contention. “At this point T will borrow from Mr. Balfour himself the argument in answer to his reasoning. In fact, Mr. Balfour in pointing out to us the event- ual danger of maintaining the subma- rines, has laid it down that countries which have maritime 3hores which have access to the sea may take advantage of this situation to gather together a force of submarines representing a con- siderable aggressive strength for use against their neighbors or against other countries. Herein lies the very danger, as pointed out by Mr. Balfour himself, which we fear and which we wisa to avoid. Tt is suggested that we give up the idea of retaining submarines: but are all the powers possessing fleets of submarines equally anxious to support such a decision? There are five powers here; sometimes called the “big three,” sometimes “big two:" we can reach de; on as far as we ourselves are con- cerned, but what will the other coun- tries do? Who can assure us that they will submit and follow our example? And then what will happen if they con- tinue to build submarines, either for their own use or for some one else? In what sort of situation would we find ourselves if. per adventure, war were to break out? We would have given up submarines and might be confronted with great submarine forces which other nations would have constructed, retain- ed or ceded to enemy pOwers. “This is the eventuality which must be faced. Will any one tell me that it is fantastic? in mind¥ which are not represented here, and which will therefore pre- serve their freedom of action and their submarine forces—what way have you of persuading them or of forcing them to follow our example? Grent Britain's Efforts. “Great Britain has tried persuasion without success. These attempts were made in the deliberations pre- liminary to the peace treaty. during which Great Britain expressed the wish that the use of submarines be forbidden, as well as in sions which brought the matter up twice, if I am not mistaken, before the league of nations. The other countries concerned refused to ac- cept the British proposals. There was nothing surprising in_this; it goes to prove that these suggestions came up against a sentiment which SPECIAL NOTICES. ' tion of Great Britain guarantees of the! is very natural and which is, not peculiar to the French. There ‘must be no misunderstanding on this poini the views we uphold are not the ex clusive views of France, they are shared by many other countries whose ‘ideas we only reflect. No country worthy of the name can leave to others the care of its nation- al defense; every country has the de- sire and the right to assure its own safety, and not to entrust to any one else the defense of its independence, v; every country tries to do- this ugh its own means and its personal resources, ‘Some of these countries are able to 1d mighty fleets and possess cap- ital ships; but those which do not dis- pose of the same resources, the same financial facilitles, are building or will build submarines, which consti- tute the weapon of the weak and are less costly. Should this right be de- nied them? They have no choice when they see other countries main- taining powerful fleets—without any warlike intention, to be sure, but with a view to protecting their own safety against any eventuality. Persuasion was of no avail; constraint will not succced any better. Besides, no one present here could ever dream of constraint, for the very simple reason that we ail see the danger of taking such an attitude. I cailed the atten- in a friendly way to the construction which might be &lven to our decisions by certain countries, and which would run counter to our common efforts to cre- ate a spirit of pea An atmosphere of peace can only reign throughout the world if we give all peoples the assurance and guaranty that this peace is based on a feeling of equity and justice which takes the interests -|ing far beyond my deserts. and 1 gratefully acknowledge the spirit in which they were made .and the lan- %uage in which they were couched. But 1 am bound, of course, to make quite clear—I will not say the whole position occupled by the British dele- gation—but certain points {n that case which T think it possible that M. Sar- raut's speech may have confused. “The argument that I brought for- ward In its aspect as connected with France, which is really the one on which 1 propose to touch at the pres- ent moment, may be put in this way: We were given to understand on the very highest authority that the dan- ger to France in the future was a danger that comes to her from the land side, and we were told in terms of unforgettable eloquence that that danger was so great and pressed so much upon the consciences of public men and the sentiments of the French public that it was quite impossible for France to permit any diminution of land armament. “The decision thus announced had a most serious effect on the develop- ment of the work of a conference called together to diminish arma- ments. This idea had to be aban- doned and the conference found itself confined to naval disarmament alone. France, having thus put an end to ali chance of even discussing disarma- ment by land, proceeds to develop her sea policy and her sea policy ei braces the creation of a vast sub- marine fleet. those two positions taken together. If the danger to France is of the mag- nitude which has been indicated and if France (which heaven forbid) will again in the future have to call upon Now let us consider{ -~ The WIll to Peace By Byrd Mock § : : The light that shone o'er Bethlehem 5 On that first Christmas night 8 Has shone again on Washington g To make the New Year bright, And free all peoples, small and great, From murderous armament, And urge good will and peace on earth, For which our Lord was sent. ©B. M. oo e e her friends and allies, Or 1ate AllieS, | m—————————————eeee for assistance in men and asslstance in munitions, it will be, 1 suppose, be- cause her great eastern neighbor has not merely revived her army, but has in part revjved her navy. The one.is not likely to take place without the! s other; both are contrary to the treaty of Versailles. Very well. Seex No Defensive Value In It. ‘We must then assume that there are 60,000,000 or 70,000,000 Germans changed snuumn'wnhou: fear and | small, which have not participated in without any misgivings. our counsels, by removing from them “Able to Defend Herself.” their weapon of defense, the sub- marin, “Great Britain is strong enough to defend herself and she wants noth- ing more than to defend herself. Nor do ] believe that any of the nations to whom reference has been made by M. Sarraut are going to run away with the idea that for any purpose act, If Mr. Balfour could harbor the slightest idea that 1 wished to impugn the motives of Great Britain, the words spoken by me at the be- ginning of my speech would bear witness to the affectionate feelings You know what Eng-| jJapan and sq |ameng us pre. siderable naval forces, and if we, at inul represented here the right to pro- | cure for themselves those smaller but of | which” they France again come to her assistance | that is to say | the question of submarines. | conference might be determined i rules applying o a more humane use of ! might be reached. |of the attacking vessels be The countries T have ! } tion they have of their responsibility i a | shall _have succeeded | him, but at least the great honor of the discus-|. | another long speech, but I must say of all into account. The day when these peoples begin to think that we are likely to mgke use of moral con- straint to impose on them our way of thinking—and I venture to emphasize this idea at the present moment. when the susceptibilities of nations should be carefully considered—I would be sorry to Erow up once more, around the beneficial work that we are accomplishing here, certain leg- ends and even certain calumnies dis- torting the trend of our purposes, like those from which we, the French, have suffered. and that we have seen only recently used against France in the press representing her in an im- jerialistic attitude. Muxt Avoid Wronx Impressions. It must not be permitted that such campaigns misinterpreting our true sentiments should be initiated against any one of us, France, Great Britain, forth. If certain ones erve more or less con- against whom France has to be pre- pared, and we must assume that those 60,000,000 or 70,000,000 Germans are i supplied, if with nothing else, at least with the easiest and the cheapest of all ships that can be built, namely, submarines. How is France going to deal with that situation? Her build- ing of submarines is no use at all. Let her make her fleet of submarines what she will, they do not protect either her own merchant ships or the transports of her neighbors and friends. They are weapons of offense, not, as we hear so often, weapons of submarines be able to give one atom of assistance to the French nation if she be threatened as I have indicated. basing my observations upon M. Briand's whole statement of the case. ‘They would afford her no assistance in her hour of peril. “To whom, then, is she going to 180k? There is but one natipn in Europe which is or can be made, so far as I can see, adequately safe against submarine attack, and that for. I almost said, social and eco- nomic reasons which cannot well be copied. We, and we alone, 5o far as I know, in Europe have that large population. that large sea-faring pop- ulation, which can be utilized for the manning of the small craft by which alone submarines can be con- trolled I those naryow waters—a pop- ulation which, as shown conclusively the same time, forbid other peoples il efficacious weapons of defense believe they need, might not the legends to which I have re- ferred tempt them to think that other more powerful countries wish to keep them in subjection. to force them to place thémsélves under their protec- tion and 1o retain them in a sort of vassalage That the impression which we ; by the experience of the late war, not must avol We must, I repeat, care- | only had the numbers but the i fully consider the mental attitude of | dividual skill, courage and capacity to deal with that situation. So that I must assume. if it be true that France, in the crisis contemplated by M. Briand, is going to call upon her ancient ailies for assistance in her hour of need, it is upon our anti- submarine craft that she will be de- pendent for the possibility of that call being obeyed. Bullt Against England. “How is that consistent with the building of this huge mass of sub- have the guaranty that they will fol- | marines which anyhody who looked low the example of not cuus:rucungi"gml and tactical point of view would sobmanings certainly say from the very geograph- guaranties, 1 consider that we cannot [ital situation was = bullt ' against come to a decision. We have come 10| [ gecept, the eloquent words that M. an agreement on the reduction of of-| L ACSCRt, the eloquent words that M. fensivesynaval fauman But the | that he, in his expression of friend- question of means of defense must be | ¢niy for Great Britain, said not one left to the consideration of the|word in excess of the truth. I know countries interested. it represents what comes from his Could Raise Question. heart. But no present expresslon of “I readily understand that a meet- good will. however sincere, can con- ing of a general conference might be trol the foture. suggested in which would be repre- “We must take account of facts. And when we try and combine the sented all the countries interested in | In this | military policy announced by M. the the peoples who are not represented here and whose eptibilities might misconstrue the exact trend of the de- cisions toward which we are collabo- rating. 7 “And thus, gentlemen. you perceive the conclusions to which 1 am lead- ing. You cannot assume here certain obligatious in the matter of subma- rines in the name of countries not taking_part in this conference; vou ! can neither persuade nor coerce them ‘ou cannot, in a way, in the absence of these Briand with the naval policy an- nounced by Admiral De Bon we can- not fail to see that here is a naval and military scheme. strangely inco- herent and inconsistent. “Men will inevitably ask themselves ‘What is the ultimate end underlying all that is being done? Against whom is this {submarine fleet being built? What purpose is it to serve? What danger to France is it intended to guard against? 1 know of no satisfactory answer to such questions. Confined to Anglo-French Position. bmarines: thé question of- the principle of the retention or abolition of the use of submarines could be raised. Then all the nations interested in the question might express their opinion and really effective decisions For the time being, 1 repeat, 1 believe that we cannot even make decisions regarding the question of the limitation of the sub- marine tonnage which constitutes a ive navy, nor an offensiv o b el €| “I have so far confined what T have “Let the tonnage of the great ships, | aid strictly to the Anglo-French po- limited | Sition, and I have tried to explain to as we have done; that is well, and [those who I know are our friends each country may make its contribu- { Why the position seems to the Brjtish tion along with its personal sacrifices | Public so inconsistent and so difficult in the matter, but, as regards the de- | to justify. Let me now say one word fensive navy, it is those countries [upon the more general aspect. I think concerned.which know best their needs | there is something to be said in favor and the - situation that they must|of this part of the contention of M. confront. {Sarraut. He asked us by what au- It is essentially a question which |thority five nations at this table could is dependent upon the sovereignty of |legislate for the world. We cannot such countries and upon the percep- |legislate for the world; we cannot compel the world to take our opinion. When he argues from that undeniable proposition, it has been stated by Mr. Hughes himself in a sentence which really covers the whole-ground: ‘Even if they were ready to adopt the prin- ciple suggested by the British delega- tion they would still have to awaig the adherence of other nations That M A is a statement which 1 entirely accept. e iy “Even if that be granted In its full M Daltour B vorry you with | €Xtent, as it should be granted, are & LLET LY 30 we to believe, if a conference of this lnuthorlty were really unanimous and really put forward upon broad moral to national safety. Such, gentleman, are the consider- ations that 1 wish to lay before Mr. Balfour; 1 do not know whether I in convincing having entered into debate with him will have been mine.” one or {wo sentences to make my po- sition clear after the words used by i grounds, the statement that in their view submarines were not a weapon f war that was consistent with civi- lization, that that would have no ef- fect? Would that not be the prelude to their ultimate abolition? JIs man- M. Sarraut. Those observations, so far as I am concerned,, were not only most courteous, but they were flatte SPECIAL NOTICES. OFFICH OF THE FIREMEN'S INSU Company of Washington and Georgetown, 7th st and Loulsiana ave. n.w.—The stockholders of the Firemen’s Insurance ‘Company of Wash- ington and Georgetown will meet at the office on londay, January 2, 1922, for the purpose of electing thirteen directors for the ensuing year. Polls open from 11 a.m. to 12 noo ALBERT W. HOWARD, Secret: GRAND AND UPRIGHT PIANOS FOR RE. mos taken in payment on Vietrolas. UGO WORCH, 1110 G n.w. Kranich & Bach d_Emerson pianve. CHAIR CANING, $1.50 UP; SPLINT CAN- tng, uphoistering parior suites, fireside chairs, dining room chairs. Call, phone or drop pos- tal; will bringgamples. CLAY A. ARMSTRONG, Franklin 7483. 1233 i0th n.w. Thousands of fine cedar and pine, located in Fairfax county, Va. Make your own selections on the ground and carry them away at 10c. Choice trees in all sizes delivered at 30c eacl Wholesale only. Main 4108 or Adams 2708. 25 USEFUL GIFTS AT PLEASING PRICES— Books, Bibles, stationery, cards, calendars, diaries, can be found at PURSELL'S, 807 G st. n.w. After the Holidays —get in touch with Casey let him install an *“Arcola Heating System.” so as to have the house comfortably warm for the rest of the winter. Installed on small monthiy pay- ments. “‘Have it done right—Get Casey.” Casey & Q’. 3207 14th ST. N.W. Phones Col. 155 and 1881 Plumbing, Steamfitting and T‘lllll:lu FLOORS WAXED, $2; CLEANED OR rel BB NASH, 405 8 ateaw Norih 3o pass The Shade Shop ‘W. STOKES SAMMONS, 830 13th St. ", M. 4874. Let Us Suggest a New Kind of Window Shades SHEDD &om aoi, oieep,thom 22 Fixu_ROOfs Tot Lon . M 81 We W4l Furnish Stock, 20-1b. bead, .nd 600 each, Letterhevds, Bavelopes and tor $9.30, ds, 1,600 in The ting Office 24th and Pa. ave. .w. Phose Mais €71 NCE \GN 7. kind so deaf to these appeals as to make them fall vainly upon uriheed- ing ears? I do not think so. Question of British Motives. NUA 1922, WE WILL INAUGU- rate a weekly Pool Vanload Service between Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia and York for small lots of household goods defense, and in no sense would those { whatever Great Britain means to be a tyrant either on land or sea. He seems to think that the smaller pow- ers. who might have rejoiced in the power to build for themselves sub- marine fleets will resent an interna- tional arrangement by which the use of submarine fleets is forbidden and that they will say. ‘This is an ex- ample of Great Britain's arrogance. pride and tyranny’ If T know any thing of the smaller nations of Eu rope, that is the very last thing they are going to say. Itis not from Brit- ish avarice or British love of domi- nation that they have ever suffered. If they consider the power of Great Britain at all, they consider it is a power to which in time of difficulty they may look for protection. If they consider the influence of Great Britain at all, they know that that influence has always been exercised on the side of liberty, and T am cer- tainly not going to be prevented from doing my best to induce this great moral reform in the use of weapons of war by the fear that the action of myself and my friends round me ! can even by the bitterest and most wiscrupulous calumny be darkened by the sort of shadows which M. Sar- raut seems to think the ingenuity of the calumniator would be able to spread over mankind. “That is all I have to say. I have not attempted. as my friends will see, to go over all the ground traversed yesterday or to deal with the funda- mental verities of the situation: but as M. Sarraut thought it desirable to bring up the international relations governing the situation and to paint the future in the colors which he seems to think appropriate, I thought it would hardly be respectful either to him or to those who are sitting round me if I remained perfectly silent under the observations which he has mad Reply by Sarraut. Mr. Sarraut said. in reply to Mr. Balfour: “I do not intend to mo- nopolize the attention of the confer- ence, but I hold it most essential to avoid any misunderstanding: and it is_indispensable to the clearness of this discussion that my thought be not misconstrued. In this connec- tion I must clarify two points on which Mr. Balfour kas dwelt. One concerns the definition of the gencral situation of France, the other deals with the possible result of the de- cision which the conference might take as regards submarines on the opinion of the world, or at least on the opinion of the powers not rep- resented here. “As regards the situation of France and the policy pursued by her in safeguarding her independence and her security, Mr. Balfour, in referring to the attitude taken here by Mr. Briand in the land armament, and relating it to our demands in | tion. which have continually inspired my thoughts. I then stated clearly that the might and the safety of Great Britain constituted one of the essen- tial safeguards of the peace of the world and of the progress of civiliza- ‘Who, moreover,! would dream today of speaking of the possible hegemony of any country in the world? ‘This dream of an earlier day. which was that of a whole people, has forever vanished in the last war. And it was your country itself, Mr. Balfour, that has largely contributed to the over- tarow of this hegemony by a contribu- tion toward the victory of right which will remain the honor and the supreme glory of your nation. Susceptibilities Into Aecount. ‘But nevertheless there remains the fact that in the fulfiilment of the task that we are here engaged upon, we have to take into account tie sus- ceptibilities of certain peoples. I have said that if you want to settle such a question as that of the suppression or rctention of the submarine, align the £mall powers on the side of the great because the small ones have also the ght to_express their views and make their voices heard. “l cannot express myself otherwise, even when speaking on behalf of a country whose liberal and peace-loving sentiments cannot be mistaken, ‘even when dealing with the problem of her safety on land and at sea. The creation of a will to peace in the world can be based only on confldence and a spirit of justice. This is the deep conviction which must be imparted to all nations: they should be persuaded of this fact. not by having it forced on them, but by letting it penetrate gently into their minds. This, and nothing else, is what e Deep Sense of Obligation. ““Tha chairman said that he thought the committee had proceeded to a point where he believed it must be concluded that it was not possible to reach an agreement on the matter just discussed. It had been the highest privilege to lis. ten to the strong and persuasive argu- ments of Mr. Balfour. It would be superfluous to say that the arguments he addressed to the committee had been perfect in construction and comprehen- siveness and admirable in their entire candor. All present must feel that they were his debtors for the intellectual pleasure he had given hem. The chair- man wished, however! to express a far deeper sense of obligation. The con- ference had been called for the limita- tion of armament: and the economic importance of limitation had been em- phasized. But in that way, limited though it might be, the conference was striving to lay a basis for an enduring peace. That was the real point of their effort. \What had impressed him most in<Mr. Balfour's statement was_ the naval matters, has appeared to ex- |SPirit with which it was imbued and the perience a feeling of surprise as re- gards this policy, which he con- sidered as a unit—a feeling of sur- prise, the causes of which. to tell the truth, I have had difficulty in under- standing. “France, it is true, is compelled to make ‘a double effort, military and naval. The reasons for this are simple and clear. As regards land defense, M. Briand has made here a! statement of the perils against which our country is obliged to guard—a final. . “He has inflicated, with a cogency to which I can add nothing, the necessity which confronted us of providing fer our defense by retain- ing a burden of armaments which re- duce us to a grievous servitude. It is not for our pleasure that we as- sume these sacrifices, and I do not believe that any one will venture to contradict this. “Not Seeking Power.” “What is the object of our efforts on the seas? Are we impelled by some proud aspiration toward an in- crease of maritime power? No; you know ‘well that we are not, since, as regards capital ships, in which lies true offensive power, that power which alone could give support to,an ambitious scheme, we have made the greatest sacrifice, and are satisfied with_the amount’ of tonnage which has been allotted to us here. It is true, we ask for submarines—but to what end? To attack our neighbors? I should not deign to reply to such a suspicion. he truth is that we are con- fronted by a situation of fact which Mr. Balfour must be aware of. Be- sides our continental coast lines, the deferise of which cannot be neglected, we possess a colonial domain whose ramifications are spread all over the world. France must have the weapon she needs to defend her possessions, Just as she must have the weapon necessary to the safety of her trans- manifest desire_to present and enforce. | al against apparently hopeless odds. | proposition which” was deemed impor- | tant for the maintenance of the peace of | the world and for such an adjustment | of weapons of war as might favor the maintenance of conditions of peace. He said that he wished to express his pro- found sympathy with what Mr. Balfour and Lord Lee had said; their argument had derived force not only from {limitation of the tonnage of subma- [discussion as of the utmost |mpor-|wm| regard to their fleld of action tance and was greatly impressed by the strength of Mr. Balfour's argu- ments in the light of the expericnce of the late war. What could be done? It had been said that there were other powers which were not represented here. The powers participating in the con- ference on ‘the limitation of arma- ment were :bound not to use that conference to !mpinge upon the full liberty of discussion of those desir- ing to be heard in a matter relating to their defense. A moral offensive— if he might be permitted to use that term—should not be conducted against them. He felt in honor bound by what had been communicated to him by other powers not represented on the committee that nothing should be done which would compromise their position on a question which they belleved related to their secur- ity, or which might prevent them from taking the measures they thought necessary for their defense. A discussion, however, which tended to bring out the truth would be as helpful to those who were not pres- ent as to those who were repre- sented. Resatriction_the Next Tople. He hoped that the discussion would lead the five powers present to agree to a denunclation of the illegal meth- ods of submarine warfare in terms clearly understandable and to bind themselves to assure the application of the principles of international Jaw in connection with submarine war- fare and to consider and debate what could be done to strengthen the laws governing the use of this weapon. The chairman then sald that, unless further discussion of the principle of the abolition of the submarine was desired, the committee should con- sider its restriction, numbers, ton-i nage, etc. He believed that those who considered that the submarine was essential should frankly tell the com- mittee how far they were prepared to go, what their minimum require- ments were and how far they were prepared to accept reduction or re- striction. The point of limitation of armament as regards submarines had been reached. With respect to the point of proposing and considering the law in the case, that matter was one where the precise phraseology must be carefully considered. With the permission of the committee, pre- cise proposals would later be brought forward by the American delegation, pending which the committee was ready to discuss the subject of the ines and all that pertained thereto. He would, therefore, ask the dele- gates to express themselves on that point. Mr. Balfour Gives Views. Mr. Balfour then said: “Will you allow me to express on behalf not only of myself, but of my colleagues on the Brifish empire dele- gation, our thanks for the speech which you have just delivered. We think that it is the happiest augury for the future. We regard your ut- terance as a great step forward, and we do not doubt that it will find an echo in all parts of the civilized weild and will greatly promote the cause we have so much at heart. You have indicated that it will be for the general convenience that this stage of our discussion should now be brought to an end, and certainly 1 believe that to be right. Will you permit me to have placed formally upon our records the views, very briefly expressed, ot the British empire delegation, which will take this shape *“The British empire delegation de- sires formally to place on record its opinion that the use, of submarines, whilst of small value for defensive purposes, leads inevitably to of war and the dictates of humanity, and the delegation desires that united action should be taken by all nations to forbid thelr maintenance, construc- tion or employment.”” The chairman assumed that there was entire agreement that the state- ment just read by Mr, Balfour should be placed on the record and that, as the views of all the delegations had been heard with regard to the aboli- acts | which are inconsistent with the laws | -3 ARTICLE I STIRS JAPANESE DEBATE Divergence of Opinion Gives Ammunition for Those Opposed to Treaty. and to their habitableness; in other words, they were too small for ef- ficient use, and .Italy is indebted to the co-operation of French and Brit- ish submarines for having been able successfully to meet the situation. Since the armistice Italy has de- molished as many as thirty subma- rines; she Is actually left with forty- three units in actlve service and four under construction, the total amount- ing to 20,250 tons. Only Tem Units Useful. Only ten of the first units may be considered of any utllity, since they are of more than 700 tons’ displace- ment; the others will have to be suc- cessively replaced. Although our naval technical au- thorities believe that the allotment of submarine tonnage should not nec- essarily be proportionate to that of capital ships, and that the quota of 31,500 tons for submarines, co responding to the American proposal of a tonnage of 175000 in capital ships, is not sufficient, the Italian del- egation is ready, in the interest of reduction of armament, to accept this amount, under the condition of parity with France. The principle of parity has been fully accepted by France and I take this occasion 1o observe that the friendly attitude of our allied nation will greatly contribute 1o strengthen the cordial relations of friendship be- tween France and Italy which consti- tute one of the principal guarantees of peace in Europe. “We are convinced on the other hand that Mr. Hughes, in considering the particular conditions which I have pointed out, wili have no difficuity in agreeing that the total tonnage of Italian submarines shall be fixed at the above mentioned limit of 31,500 tons, on the condition, it is<well un- derstood, that the same limits be ac- cepted by the neighboring nation. Concerning this point we have pre- cise and categorical instructions from our government. SOME MINIMIZE DISPUTE One Newspaper Declares Matter Is Too Puny for Any More Hag- gling About Words. By the Associated Press, TOKIO, December 21.—The div Bence of opinion as to whether article Ii of the four-power treaty, negoti- ated at Washington, appl Japanese mainland has supplie ammunition for Japanese new: opposed to that document. The more important journals, however, s have taken a more rational view cu%lez iraseology of this much-dis- e Asahi Shimb: el 3 ‘l:le:;un:!l‘nls"f:r‘mrily because the Japan Tor diametrically opporie sl sons, but the Asahi wnticipates fur- ther difficul 3 , g rowing o am- Hanihara Explatns Japan's Views. )i/ (IS krawing out of i Mr. Hanihara then said the Japa- S . nese delegation had been profoundiy ¥ uURgests Modification, impressed by the able and powerful _;’h‘- Yamato Shimbun questions arguments of their most esteemed |Whether the Jupanese delegates have British collegues against submarines, | 8iVen their approval of the documen, which it had been mot only a privi-|S2¥ing: “If Admiral Kato was un- lege but an Inspiration to listen to. |3Ware of the defect. all that is neces: And vet the Japanese delegation was | 4Ty Will be to axk the powers to ;v'.‘u:dnpfz;m(‘he phrz;--ulu,,',\. Otherwise, 3 e must hol uron Ka e meople must hold Baron Kato re The Hochi Shimbun expresse. opinion that the Japancse msula; pos. sessions in the Pacific are so closely related 1o the Japanese mainland that any menacing influgnee must aflect both. Thercfore, says the news- paper, as a practical problem the 1ssue dwindles 1o nothingness. The Kokumin Shimbun says the issue is merely a question of whether Japan will grasp a substantial gain fat the cost of honor and prestige, Calls Dispute Pun. unable, he had to confess, to con- vince {tself that the submarine was not an effective and necessary weapon for defense. The Japanese delegation hoped that it had made clear, at the time when the provisional agreement was reach- ed between the United States, Great Britain and Japan on the question of the capital ship ratio, that the ac- ceptance by Japan of the ratio of 3 meant for Japan a considerable sacrifice. Yet because of her desire to contribute toward the achievement of the great object for which the conference had been called Japan finally accepted the said ratio under various great difficulties. In the same| The Jiji Shimpo, in ment, manner Japan wag prepared to accept | 95 COmMmon sonxe just exclusion the same ratio in regard to sub-i9f the main islands of the Jupunese e ioaa'® That would have given|empire from the provisions of ik Tapan 54000 tons. So far ae Japan | Leaty. bul adds that 4 legal scrutiny e mcerned this figure was consld-{of the document admits of 4 double ered as the minimum amount of sub- | IDterpretation. The newspaper jus- marine tonnage with which the in-|tifies the position taken by Secretary sular position of Japan could bejOf State Hughes. but concludes its - :fll{:orl‘ul h(i‘d saying the dispute is 100 Y 10 add 10 it any more ha over phrascology. L The Yorozo Choro expre pointment that the Japane ment appears to b, ferent to the question.” PORTO RICANS DEMAND EFFICIENCY IN SERVICE adequately defended. The new proposal was to allow the United States and Great Britain 60,000 tons each, while France, Italy and Japan were to maintain the status quo in regard to their respec- tive submarine tonnage. In other words, under this new plan, Japan would be aliowed to have only 31,000 { tons. That was considered by the Japanese delegation to be wholly in- adequate for Japan's defensive pur- poses. The Japanese delegation, therefore, feit constrained to insist upon the assignment of the tonnage proposed in the original American profect, i. e. 54,000 tons of submarines. hout wishing for a moment to debate or to call in question any part of the arguments so ably and so eloquently presented by the various delegates, Mr. Hanihara hoped that he might be permitted to point out that this demand on the part of Japan es disap- ¢ govern- crenely indif- Commissioner Says They Do Not Object to Appointees From This Country If Justly Named. The people of Porto Rico do not “complain” of the “ratio of appoint- ments as between the continental mericans and Porto Ricans.” but 4o tion of submarines. the committee might proceed to the discussion of the limitation of submarine tonnage. American Proposal Questioned. In the course of the discussion iticould not constitute a menace against had been remarked that, as far as submarines were concerned, the American proposal was hardly a limi- tation. The American delegation thought that, so far as American su marine tonnage was concerned, the remark in question had been Wased a misapprehension and that there ha e 93:00 | French government. the French dele- to bef had been a reduction—from tons to 90,000 tons-—slight, sure, but still a reduction. He desired, however, to make this suggestion. 1t was impossible marines without forming an impres- sfon of the views entertained by the delegations on this matter. The American delegation was entirely will- ing to accept, instead of 90,000 tons proposed as the maximum limit for the United States, 60,000 tons, thus scrapping 35,000 tons of the existing submarine tonnage, on the basis that ! Great Britain should also accept 60,000 humanitarian sentiment, not only from {tons as her maximum limit of sub- abhorrence of the atrocities of sub-jmarines and scrap o ot Y nioh Cpaged to BUATI—a | marine warfare. but also because it had been buttressed by facts drawn from the extended experience of Great Britain— an experience which presented tests of all the questions raised here. If the argument of Mr. Balfour and Lord. Lee could be answered, the chair- man thought that that answer had vet to come. He perceived from his more or less impartial position the great dif- ficulties involved in presenting a tech- nical answer. He distrusted his ability to judge of the technical naval argu- ment, but he believed that those taking upon themselves the burden of that ef- {fort would have much to do. Technical Opinion Differs. “He was quite aware that in the United States there was widespread sentiment against the submarine. largely due to the feeling that had been aroused by the abhorrent uses to which the submarine had been put. There was a very strong senti- ment against _the submarine and that, as an offensive weapon, it should be outlawed—a feeling that would be powerfully reinforced by what had been said here. While the chairman felt that there was no im- mediate prospect of the adoption of the proposal. the words of Mr. Bal- four and Lord Lee would carry far beyond this conference and power- fully influence the development of public opinion throughout the world. He was not prepared to say that their suggestions might not ultim- ately be successful in inducing the nations to forego the use of a weapon which, as Mr. Balfour had urged, freight. Inquiries solicited. THE BIG 4 TRANSFER CO., Inc., 1125 1th st. nw.| “I think if it were possible for this AT 21 L0 de248t _|conference of the United States of WANTED—A VAN OF ITURE TO New Yok City. DecrSe. 93 or o, TEHE BIg |America, Japan, France, Italy and 4 TRANSFER CO., Inc,, 1125 1ith st. n.w. |Great Britain—the five great naval COND PAIR OF GLASSES —which can be kept at the office, will prove a gift of great convenience to *‘dad.’ ' Claflin Optical Co., 1314 G st. Formely Gof, 0th a5 ¥ 5o 8 Yours. |PROTECT YOUR HOME Let us repair that leaky roof before the bad weather sets in. R. K. FERGUSON, Inc. 1114 9th 8t. Phone North 231-283, R Experts. WANTED—TO CARRY A VANLOAD OF FUR- niture from Washington to Philadelphis and e Yotk SMITH'S TRANSFER 'AND STOR: Tin Roofs—Slag Roofs KEPAIRED AND PAINTED. Call Main 760, 5 Wash. Loan & Grafton&Son Inc. e i’ A New Roof With a Brush When you use Liquid Asbestos Cement. I will apply same and guarantee roof five gours from all leaks = Also wid in' bulk. nning, Gutters and Spouts. Prompt service, Madison Clark, 1314 Pa. ave. s.e. Line. 4219, 2 THIE ORIGINAL BIGGS. Making Heating Plants —more efficient is our big mission in life, so see us If you're interested in heat. We mod. ernize hot water, V. P, steam and other systems in short order and at Moderate Cost, &4 We also do PLUMBING reasonably, The Biggs Engineering e c‘%fi.;ggg;'{v. nicos l!rr:-';::‘m&” ROOFS REPAIRED! —High winds loosen many a roof and the next rain is bound to cause leaks and ruin. Is your roof safe? Better let our experts look it over. IRONCUAD £xiis 58250 who h her did Dot think it worth while, and for all those years the British fleets were by far the largest that traversed the ocean. build, the United States and Japan followed suit, and that state of things powers—to give expression in fitting language to that view it would be the beginning of a great and beneficent reform. M. Sarraut apparently does not think it would be a reform, or at all events he thinks that whatever it might be, taken by itself, the very fact that it had been brought forward by Great Britain, advocated by Great Britain and adopted by this confer- ence on the appeal of Great Britain, would give rise to endless calumni and that Great Britain herself might suffer from the notion that in making this appeal we had been animated solely by selfish motives and a desire to dominate weaker neighbors by our superior sea power. “But is such misrepresentation pos- sible? If it were attempted would it be believed? .Without going into the depths of history, for the whole of the nineteenth century, after 1815, Great Britain was the unquestioned sea power which had no rival. Those the wealth to build against ‘Then Germany to has come to an end. “Is the history of Great Britain during those years one favorable or unfavorable to peace, favorable or unfavorable to liberty? It was dur- ing those years that Greece became free, that Italy became united, that all the btates of South America de clared themseives independent repu lics. So far as I remember, there was only one European war in which we were engaged, and in that war we were the allies of France. I cannot imagine anybody reading history sup- posing that even if the relative power of Great Britain in the century which is to come was comparable to the relative sea power in the cen- tury which hai Pmod the liberties of the world would have anything to fear. I look forward myself to the especially aimed against Great Britain. ports and her lines of communication | was valuable only as an aggressive between the mother cquntry and her| weapon. and then only in a form colonies, both near ami distant. In|of aggression condemned by hu- time of peace France scatters her|manity and international law. military forces throughout her pos-| “There existed a very great diffi- sessions; ‘her forces, as you know,|oculty because of the difference of are divided among the mother coun- | tecknical cpinion on this point. Naval try, north Africa, and her various colo- | experts did not agree, and it was ni impossible to ignore their views. So here is, then, a logical connec-|far as the United States was con- tion between her indispensable mili- | cerned, the matter had been ex- tary power and her naval force. She|amined by the advisory committee should in any evept keep the means| which, although it had not had the of assuring the safe transportation|advantage of hearing these argu- ©of her troops to the mother country,| ments, had nevertheless produced and for this purpose decidedly she|an able, illuminating and conserva- must have at her command a certain| tive report. As France, Italy and force. This is why, after having con- | Japan had manifested an inabflity to sented to this sacrifice which you|agree, it would be impossible at this have asked of us in the matter of|time to expect a result favorable to capital ships, we come here to set|the adoption here of a resolution to forth our situation; to state in all|abolish the submarine. frankness and all simplicity the ob-1 Arguments Impress President ligations and the reasons of our naval program, which is based on| The chairman said that he had needs whose reality cannot be doubt-| the pleasure of conferring with the ed. And when we have laid before| President in regard to this matter you the sincere, definite and precise|and had found him deeply impressed reasons for our program, how could|with tne strength of the arguments we be suspected of any secret de-|presented and' the spirit animating signs against which the very frank-|them. If at any time it were found ness of our explanations protests. to be feasible to take the matter up, ‘Wishes .to Avold Suspicion. the United States govergment would 3 ive it their most serlous attention. \ “As to the myths, the imputations o which I have referred as possibly %’“’ chairman hoped that what had said here would prove provoca- penetrating beyond the dircle of the | (iva" powers here represented, I am as. | {'veof thousht throughout the entire world. When adherence could be ex~ tonished at l“'; '"“fll’;'““c’fl Put | pected to the principle of abolition, O e ot e e MOthInE—T | the subject would be again considered. need not insist on the fact—which is| He hoped that it would be clearly un- derstood that the submarine would not be countenanced as a weapon really suited only to offensive attack And if, on the contrary, I have out- }{ned these ranr‘-hvery lnnl:l;{ to you, was because the reproach to which | (if that be the fact) under the gui; I have already alluded might some |of a weapon which vz'u only lvell‘l:b’: time be laid against our common | for a very limited purpose of defense work, against all powers, without ex- | (if that, too, be the fact). He was not ception, which are deliberating here,|a naval expert; the position of the and because I wish to avoid for all| American vernment was well of us, without exception, any suspicion | et forth as 1t could be in th:. 'state- of having attempted to reduce to|ment of the advisory committee. The vassalage those powers, large and' American government welcomed the American figures. make whatever accommodation wasl { possible to meet the views entertained by the other delegations, man suggested States and Great Britain each reduced the maximum limit of their submarine tonnage to 60,000 tons, France, Japan and Italy should retain the tonnage they have—in other words, maintain the status quo as regards submarine tonnage. order to show that so far as the American government was concerned, it was not in favor of gnything that savored of expansion. This was a conference on limitation. In reply to an inguiry by Lord Lee, the chairman said that he understood that the present submarine tonnage of Japan was 31,452 tons; that of France, | according to the figures given the olher‘ day, was 31,391 tons and that of lul)l somewhat less, about 21,000 tons. The, meeting then adjourned until 3:30 p.m., December 24, 1921. Fifth Joint Meeting. The fifth joint meeting of the com- mittee on limitation of armament and the subcommittee on naval limita- tion was held in the Pan-American Building this afternoon, December 24, 1921, at 3:30 o'clock. concerning the limitation of subma- rine tonnage was continued, and Mr. Balfour accepted, on behalf of the British empire, the American proposal that the maximum submarine tonnage for the American and British navies should be 60,000 tons. Senator Schanzer spoke as follows: My colleagues are acquainted with the principles upon which, according to our opinion, the solution of the problem of naval armaments must be based. We have laid down trese principles ever since the first meeting of this committee; they have been ac- cepted by you, and we could not de- part from them even today. These principles are the parity of of naval armaments to the guantity strictly necessary for a defensive naval policy. The above principles have been ap- plied in regard to capital ships; they must also be applied with regard to the other categories of naval arma- ment. Would Widen Claim. May I venture to add that, in view of the entirely special conditions of Italy’s maritime position we could claim, without being accused of ad- vancing excessive demands, an even greater proportion with regard to categories other than capital ships, such as submarines and light craft. 1 appesl to the demonstrations which Mr. Balfour himself made yesterday in his eloquent speech while referring to Italy’s almost insular geographical situation, by which she depends on the sea for the supply of her food and of the most indispensable of her raw materials, and whose coast extension exceeds by far that of all other coun- tries in the Mediterranean. It may be added that the conditions of our submarine flotilla are abso. lutely insufficient from a technical point of vie' Despite (m{tefl tions in the c imity of the ememy's mnaval bases from our own (roughly, 100 miles) Italy found during the war that her submarines “were insufficient both {reduction in the sub | to| hear all the arguments regarding sub- 22,464 tons—her |ancther, ti'e French a third, the Italians peresent amount of submarine tonnage {a fourth and the Japanese a fifth. He being 82,464 tons, according to the}did not say that it mattered very much t N TONOPAH. Nev., December 24— Then, in a desire to |in ordinary circumstances which system ! Three men lost their lives and ten of tonnage was emploved ; but now that | were seriously injured in a fire last international arrangements were being & night which destroyed the Belmont the chair-{made for the future he thought it em-!\ining Compan: boarding house, that if the United |inently desirable and almost indis-{known to mining men as the “Big pensable to settle two questions: Ship.” Workmen are searching the He made the suggestion ln' ibrought to a satisfactory conclusion. ! ‘The discussion I ‘object to the lack of quallfication of ll:le appointee: Resident Commis sioner Davila yesterday wrote Presi dent Harding. The President recently wrote Sena. tor King. democrat, of Utah. giving information as to appointments in the island administration. which the sena- tor had requested in a resolution in the Senate. In his letter Commissioner Davila said Porto Ricans did not object to Americans holding office simply be- cause they were born outside of the island, but that “we cannot agree ‘to the substitution of competent native Porto Ricans by Am.ricans when the former have proven their efliciency and ability The cases of the commissioner of the interior and chief of the health derartment were cited as in this class. The commissioner also con- demned the action of Gov. Reily in naming a private secretary and chief of the secret service, neither of whom, he said, speaks Spanish. Other i stances of alleged injustice to island- ers in filling offices were enumerated. THREE DIED IN FIRE. was actuated solely by consideration of defense. Japan was geographically so remotely situated that it must be evident to all that her submarines any nation. French Await Instructions. Mr. Sarraut stated that, in view of the fact that the new American proposal contemplated a considerable | rine tonnage the which appeared necessary 1o gation could not do otherwise thanj await instruction. Mr. Balfour then said that as tae committee appeared to be at the end of their day's program he wou'd like to ask the chairman and his colleagues | whether a technical examination should ! not be initiatad of the system of naval | tons and the measuremert of tonnage. | He had been brought to make is‘ suggestion by a_discovery. made some- what late ir the day. that although! there had been much talk of “tons” different rations did not always mean the same thing. The United States had one method of measurement, the Britisa First, to decide the system of meas- urement of tons for incorporation in the treaty, and. second, to adopt a system which could be measured = i t difficulty: above all, without . without difficulty e ouf open Evemngs any international misunderstanding , L ) Circulating Library as to its precise meaning. Nothing! All the Latest Books could be more unfortunate than a PEARLMAN'S BOOK SHOP ruins today to learn if others may have been killed. controversy arising as to what ton was intended, how the measurement was to be made and as to whether the measurement had been properly { and honestly reached. He suggested this question might with advantage be referred to a technical expert. Although he believed that this matter was outside the range of thought of the ordinary naval officer, vet he be- lieved that among the various dele- gations people could be found who; could reach a proper conclusion. This would be a fitting corollary to the labors of the conference which | in many respects had already been HOUSES Furnishea Unfuraished FOR RENT o Frem §185 Per Moath Up JOHN W. THOMPSON & CO. ——INC, o 831 15th St Maln 1477 ‘Whether the total tonnage should be a multiple of that of the largest ship he did not venture to say, but he thought all would agree that to es- tablish exactly what a ton meant be desirable. How this in-| quiry, if approved, should be carried out, he would gladly leave to the the Itallan fleet with all other large neighboring fleet and the reduction discretion of the chairman. The chairman said that the matter of tonnage had already been in- formally discussed; the British, with their legend ton, according to Mr. Balfour, ceme within 4 or 5 per cent of the American ton, and Ad- miral Kato had said that the Jap- anese ton was even closer to the British than the American. The chairman said he thought the sug- gestion_of great importance; while the difference w not great, the method of arriving at the calculation was the question on #hich it was necessary to agree. ‘He suggested : BUSINESS COLLEGE 719-21 13th St. (Bet. G & H) New Loeation, School Bullding. Augmented Equipmen Positions Procured For that a sub committee of experts should determine upon the standard ton. If it were agreeable to the com- mittee, he would suggest that each of the delegations appoint two naval experts for the purpose of arriving at a definite conclusion in this mat- ter. ¢ This procedure was agreed to and the following sub committee on naval tonnage was named: United States—Admiral Taylor, Ad- miral Pratt. British Empire—Rear Admiral Sir Ernle Chatfleld, Instruc- tion Commander Stanton. France— Capitaine De Vaissean Frochot, Capi- taine De Vaisseau Dupuy-Dutenips. Italy—Vice Admiral Baron Acton, Commander Prince Fabrizio Ruspoli. The meeting then adjourned until Tuesday next, December 27, 1921, at 11 o'clock a.m. —_— BOSTON, Mass, December 24.—Sam- uel Silas Curry, founder and president of the Boston School of Oratory and a former instructor in oratory at Harvard and at Yale, died at his home here to- day. He was the author of many books on the subjects-of elocution and oratory and for many y-r'-' edited “Expres- sion,” a quarterly review. abn'n Curry was seventy-five years old. Ho was born in Chatata, Tenn. . & Enlarged Superior Courses. All Graduates. 4 Free Public Lectures Mr. Ernevst Wood Monday, SAMUEL SILAS CURRY DEAD.|| Wednesday, Thursday, Character” N “Thought and F!I(ll!y Its Effect.” 8 PM. THEOSOPHICAL HALL oN THEOSOPHY Of Adyar, Madras, India. “The Purpose In Human Life.” “Self Reliance and Devotion.” “The Bullding of 1218 H St. N,