Article ED.

Each of the High Contracting Parties undertakes that, as soon as the convention has come into force for it, it will begin the necessary measures for carrying the provisions of the convention into effect.

Observations and

Reservations.

Article EF.

Reservation by the The present convention shall remain in force for British delegation, which years as from the exchange of ratifications.

considers that different

hand, and naval arma

periods ought to be pre- In case none of the High Contracting Parties shall have scribed for air and land given notice to terminate two years before the expiration armaments on the one of the said periods, the provisions of the convention shall ments on the other hand. continue in force until the expiration of two years from the Reservation by the date on which such notice shall be given by one of the gations regarding this parties.

French and Italian dele

question, requiring equal If the party by which such notice is given is among treatment for all three those to be mentioned in the last paragraph of Article EB categories of armaments.

above, all the High Contracting Parties shall, within one year of the date of the notice, meet in conference to consider the continuance of the provisions to be terminated. In the event of any such conference failing to come to an agreement, accepted by all the parties other than the party which has given the notice, as to the continuance of the provisions to be terminated, or as to the substitution of others, they will terminate on the expiration of the two years provided for in the notice.

If the High Contracting Parties, other than the party which has given notice to terminate, agree upon the terms of other stipulations in substitution for those to be terminated, the latter shall continue in force for all parties other than that which gave the notice until the coming into force of the new stipulations.

If the party by which notice to terminate is given is not among those to be mentioned in the last paragraph of Article EB above, the convention will remain in force for all High Contracting Parties other than that by which the notice was given.

Notices under this article shall be given to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations and shall be deemed to have been given on the day on which the notice was received by him.

Speeches in Plenary Session by the Right Hon. W. C. BRIDGEMAN, M.P., First Lord of the Admiralty

Presented by the First Lord of the Admiralty
to Parliament by Command of His Majesty,
October, 1927

LONDON:

PUBLISHED BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE. To be purchased directly from H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE at the following addresses : Adastral House, Kingsway, London, W.C.2; 120, George Street, Edinburgh ; York Street, Manchester; 1, St. Andrew's Crescent, Cardiff;

15, Donegall Square West, Belfast;

or through any Bookseller.

1927

Price 6d. Net.

Cmd. 2964.

I.

FIRST PLENARY SESSION.

20th June 1927.

MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN: I count it a great privilege to take part in this Conference as one of the British delegates, and I desire first of all to thank, on behalf of His Majesty's Government in Great Britain, the President of the United States for sending out the invitation, the Swiss Confederation for their hospitality, and the League of Nations for their great kindness in accommodating us so comfortably at Geneva, and all their help in arranging the meeting.

It was an invitation which we could readily accept. It so happened that a few days before President Coolidge's invitation was sent, I had put before my Prime Minister certain proposals on which the Admiralty had been at work for some months, with a request that steps might be taken to ascertain whether a Conference could be summoned for their consideration by the Powers which participated in the Washington Conference.

Such steps became unnecessary on the receipt a few days later of the President's invitation and his intimation that the scope of the Conference would not merely be confined to the discussion of the ratio.

It is a matter of deep regret to His Majesty's Government that France and Italy have not found themselves able to take a full part. But it is my earnest hope that any agreement which may be reached in this Conference will be of such a nature as to make it easier for them to consider adherence at no very distant date.

We are fortunate in meeting at a time when relations between the three Powers represented here, and the other Powers invited, are of such a friendly character, and when we remember, as Mr. Gibson has reminded us, that each of us has loyally carried out the Agreement arrived at in Washington.

The great achievements of the Washington Conference of 1921 are not perhaps so generally realised as they deserve to be. Let me recall the situation as it existed before that Conference, little more than six years ago.

Already designs were in contemplation for huge battleships of 45,000 tons displacement armed with 18 or 20-inch guns, while the number of such vessels was only limited by the willingness and capacity of any Nation to pay for their construction and maintenance. Each Nation was watching another and the danger of a recommencement of ruinous competition was imminent.

The Conference held at Washington put an end to this tendency-a great attainment in itself. But it did more. It proved the possibility of limiting by agreement the scale of armaments to be maintained.

We feel that the time is ripe for a further extension of this principle, and I am authorised to put before you proposals which will mark a further step in the progressive decrease of armaments and, while maintaining the respective security of our several Nations at sea, will reduce the standard of Naval armament.

I am quite convinced that we are all animated by a strong desire to reach agreement, and a readiness to appreciate the special conditions which differentiate our respective positions. And I think our deliberations are more likely to reach a successful conclusion if each country adopts an attitude of complete frankness in stating what Naval force they want and why they want it. I am assuming that none of the Countries represented here to-day, and Mr. Gibson has assumed the same, require a Navy for aggressive purposes, and that we have come together to consider what we require respectively for the defence of our existing interests, and are prepared with arguments in support of those requirements based purely on defensive considerations.

And so I will begin by an attempt to make clear what are the considerations which govern the position of Great Britain and the British Empire.

In doing so I shall not be revealing any secrets hitherto unknown. Indeed, I am more likely to be accused of repeating well-worn platitudes.

Nevertheless, I will, for the sake of clearing the ground for discussion, put the following facts before you, fully realising that for other countries other considerations deserve the special attention of the Conference.

First and foremost there is the insular position of the Mother Country, which I represent, and the fact that she is almost entirely dependent not only for raw material, but also for her food supplies and her very existence upon free passage upon the seas. It is no exaggeration to say that if the seas were closed to ships trading with our country, we should be faced with starvation within a few weeks. My countrymen would never consent to take any risk of such a catastrophe. This obvious fact places us in a position totally different from that of any other country in the world, and makes discussion on Naval disarmament, I think, more difficult for us than any other Power.

The other important factors in our case are the immense lengths of the routes over which our trade is carried, and the very large coast lines which bound the various parts of the Empire, and the necessity of providing reasonable protection for these extensive shores and long lines of communication against any aggression, however unlikely such a menace may appear at the moment to be.

O (35)29165 Wt 14283-6939 1750 11/27

A 2

In this second consideration, more closely than the first, the welfare of the outlying parts of the Empire is very deeply concerned. Our situation is very plain, but its very simplicity is a measure of its vital seriousness to us. At the same time we feel that there are limitations in Naval Armament, beyond those which have been accepted in the Washington Conference, to which we could safely agree if the other Powers found themselves able to consent.

I have listened with very great interest to the statement made by the Chairman, and with a very large measure of agreement with the principles which underlay it, but I think he will agree with me, and I hope that Viscount Saito, too, will agree with me, that to-day it will perhaps be better to confine ourselves to our own aspect of the question, and not to discuss the proposals which other countries have made. I think we shall be able to discuss them more fairly and more satisfactorily after we have had a little more time to think them over, and therefore, rather than discussing the proposals which he has made, I should like to lay before you the proposals which I am authorised to make on behalf of the British Government.

I shall do it, as briefly as I can, and without entering into details which can be left for examination and explanation later. The main proposals which we have to make are

(1) The extension of the accepted life of existing Capital Ships from 20 to 26 years and a consequent waiver by the three Powers of their full rights under the replacement tables agreed upon at Washington. Such an arrangement would naturally have to provide for some little elasticity on each side of that figure.

(2) The fixing of the life of other vessels—

(a) 8-inch gun Cruisers at 24 years;

(b) Destroyers at 20 years;

(c) Submarines at 15 years.

(3) The reduction in the size of any Battleships to be built in the future from the present limit of 35,000 tons displacement to something under 30,000 tons.

(4) Reduction in the size of guns in Battleships from the present limit of 16-inch to 13.5-inch.

(5) Limitation of the displacement of Aircraft Carriers to 25,000 tons instead of the present limit of 27,000 tons. (6) Reduction of guns on Aircraft Carriers from 8-inch to 6-inch.

(7) Acceptance of the existing ratio 5. 5. 3 for Cruisers of 10,000 tons displacement carrying 8-inch guns.

The number of these larger cruisers which each of the three countries require can be the subject of further discussion.

(8) A limitation of 7,500 tons and 6-inch guns to be placed on all future Cruisers after the number of 10,000-ton Cruisers has been decided upon.