London treaty Part II

[GravyDave1]

Had to break it up guys.

Article 16

 

1. The completed tonnage in the cruiser, destroyer and submarine categories which is not to be exceeded on 31 December 1936 is given in the following table:

 

Categories	United States	British Commonwealth of Nations	Japan
Cruisers: (a) with guns of more than 6.1 inch (155 mm) calibre	180,000 tons (182,880 metric tons)	146,800 tons (149,149 metric tons)	108,400 tons (110,134 metric tons)
(b) with guns of 6.1 inch (155 mm) calibre or less	143,500 tons (145,796 metric tons)	192,200 tons (195,275 metric tons)	100,450 tons (102,057 metric tons)
Destroyers	150,000 tons (152,400 metric tons)	150,000 tons (152,400 metric tons)	105,500 tons (107,188 metric tons)
Submarines	52,700 tons (53,543 metric tons)	52,700 tons (53,543 metric tons)	52,700 tons (53,543 metric tons)

 

2. Vessels which cause the total tonnage in any category to exceed the figures given in the foregoing table shall be disposed of gradually during the period ending on 31 December 1936.

 

3. The maximum number of cruisers of sub-category (a) shall be as follows: for the United States, eighteen; for the British Commonwealth of Nations, fifteen; for Japan, twelve.

 

4. In the destroyer category not more than sixteen percent of the allowed total tonnage shall be employed in vessels of over 1,500 tons (1,524 metric tons) standard displacement. Destroyers completed or under construction on 1 April 1930 in excess of this percentage may be retained, but no other destroyers exceeding 1,500 tons (1,524 metric tons) standard displacement shall be constructed or acquired until a reduction to such sixteen percent has been effected.

 

5. Not more than twenty-five percent of the allowed total tonnage in the cruiser category may be fitted with a landing-on platform or deck for aircraft.

 

6. It is understood that the submarines referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 7 will be counted as part of the total submarine tonnage of the High Contracting Party concerned.

 

7. The tonnage of any vessels retained under Article 13 or disposed of in accordance with Annex II to Part II of the present Treaty shall not be included in the tonnage subject to limitation.

 

 

Article 17

 

A transfer not exceeding ten percent of the allowed total tonnage of the category or sub-category into which the transfer is to be made shall be permitted between cruisers of sub-category (b) and destroyers.

 

 

Article 18

 

The United States contemplates the completion by 1935 of fifteen cruisers of sub-category (a) of an aggregate tonnage of 150,000 tons (152,400 metric tons). For each of the three remaining cruisers of sub-category (a) which it is entitled to construct the United States may elect to substitute 15,166 tons (15,409 metric tons) of cruisers of sub-category (b). In case the United States shall construct one or more of such three remaining cruisers of sub-category (a), the sixteenth unit will not be laid down before 1933 and will not be completed before 1936; the seventeenth will not be laid down before 1934 and will not be completed before 1937; the eighteenth will not be laid down before 1935 and will not be completed before 1938.

 

 

Article 19

 

Except as provided in Article 20, the tonnage laid down in any category subject to limitation in accordance with Article 16 shall not exceed the amount necessary to reach the maximum allowed tonnage of the category, or to replace vessels that become "over-age" before 31 December 1936. Nevertheless, replacement tonnage may be laid down for cruisers and submarines that become "over-age" in 1937, 1938 and 1939, and for destroyers that become "over-age" in 1937 and 1938.

 

 

Article 20

 

Notwithstanding the rules for replacement contained in Annex I to Part II:

 

(a) The "Frobisher" and "Effingham" (United Kingdom) may be disposed of during the year 1936. Apart from the cruisers under construction on 1 April 1930, the total replacement tonnage of cruisers to be completed, in the case of the British Commonwealth of Nations, prior to 31 December 1936, shall not exceed 91,000 tons (92,456 metric tons).

 

(b) Japan may replace the "Tama" by new construction to be completed during the year 1936.

 

© In addition to replacing destroyers becoming "over-age" before 31 December 1936, Japan may lay down, in each of the years 1935 and 1936, not more than 5,200 tons (5,283 metric tons) to replace part of the vessels that become "over-age" in 1938 and 1939.

 

(d) Japan may anticipate replacement during the term of the present Treaty by laying down not more than 19,200 tons (19,507 metric tons) of submarine tonnage, of which not more than 12,000 tons (12,192 metric tons) shall be completed by 31 December 1936.

 

 

Article 21

 

If, during the term of the present Treaty, the requirements of the national security of any High Contracting Party in respect of vessels of war limited by Part III of the present Treaty are in the opinion of that Party materially affected by new construction of any Power other than those who have joined in Part III of this Treaty, that High Contracting Party will notify the other Parties to Part III as to the increase required to be made in its own tonnages within one or more of the categories of such vessels of war, specifying particularly the proposed increases and the reasons therefor, and shall be entitled to make such increase. Thereupon the other Parties to Part III of this Treaty shall be entitled to make a proportionate increase in the category or categories specified; and the said other Parties shall promptly advise with each other through diplomatic channels as to the situation thus presented.

 

 

PART IV

 

 

Article 22

 

The following are accepted as established rules of International Law:

 

(1) In their action with regard to merchant ships, submarines must conform to the rules of International Law to which surface vessels are subject.

 

(2) In particular, except in the case of persistent refusal to stop on being duly summoned, or of active resistance to visit or search, a warship, whether surface vessel or submarine, may not sink or render incapable of navigation a merchant vessel without having first placed passengers, crew and ship's papers in a place of safety. For this purpose the ship's boats are not regarded as a place of safety unless the safety of the passengers and crew is assured, in the existing sea and weather conditions, by the proximity of land, or the presence of another vessel which is in a position to take them on board.

 

The High Contracting Parties invite all other Powers to express their assent to the above rules.

 

 

PART V

 

 

Article 23

 

The present Treaty shall remain in force until 31 December 1936, subject to the following exceptions:

 

(1) Part IV shall remain in force without limit of time;

 

(2) The provisions of Articles 3, 4 and 5, and of Article 11 and Annex II to Part II so far as they relate to aircraft carriers, shall remain in force for the same period as the Washington Treaty.

 

Unless the High Contracting Parties should agree otherwise by reason of a more general agreement limiting naval armaments, to which they all become parties, they shall meet in conference in 1935 to frame a new treaty to replace and to carry out the purposes of the present Treaty, it being understood that none of the provisions of the present Treaty shall prejudice the attitude of any of the High Contracting Parties at the conference agreed to.

 

 

Article 24

 

1. The present Treaty shall be ratified by the High Contracting Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional methods and the ratifications shall be deposited at London as soon as possible.[2] Certified copies of all the procès-verbaux of the deposit of ratifications will be transmitted to the Governments of all the High Contracting Parties.

 

2. As soon as the ratifications of the United States of America, of His Majesty the King of Great Britain, Ireland and the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, in respect of each and all of the Members of the British Commonwealth of Nations as enumerated in the preamble of the present Treaty, and of His Majesty the Emperor of Japan have been deposited, the Treaty shall come into force in respect of the said High Contracting Parties.[3]

 

3. On the date of the coming into force referred to in the preceding paragraph, Parts I, II, IV and V of the present Treaty will come into force in respect of the French Republic and the Kingdom of Italy if their ratifications have been deposited at that date; otherwise these Parts will come into force in respect of each of those Powers on the deposit of its ratification.

 

4. The rights and obligations resulting from Part III of the present Treaty are limited to the High Contracting Parties mentioned in paragraph 2 of this Article. The High Contracting Parties will agree as to the date on which, and the conditions under which, the obligations assumed under the said Part III by the High Contracting Parties mentioned in paragraph 2 of this Article will bind them in relation to France and Italy; such agreement will determine at the same time the corresponding obligations of France and Italy in relation to the other High Contracting Parties.

 

 

Article 25

 

After the deposit of the ratifications of all the High Contracting Parties, His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will communicate the provisions inserted in Part IV of the present Treaty to all Powers which are not signatories of the said Treaty, inviting them to accede thereto definitely and without limit of time.

 

Such accession shall be effected by a declaration addressed to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

 

 

Article 26

 

The present Treaty, of which the French and English texts are both authentic, shall remain deposited in the archives of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Duly certified copies thereof shall be transmitted to the Governments of all the High Contracting Parties.

 

 

IN FAITH WHEREOF the abovenamed Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty and have affixed thereto their seals.

 

 

DONE at London, the twenty-second day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty.

 

 

[signatures not reproduced here.]

 

 

PROCÈS-VERBAL OF THE DEPOSIT OF RATIFICATIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL TREATY FOR THE LIMITATION AND REDUCTION OF NAVAL ARMAMENT

 

 

The undersigned, having met together for the purpose of proceeding to the deposit of ratifications of the Treaty for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval Armament, signed at London, 22 April 1930;

 

Having produced the instruments whereby the said Treaty has been ratified by the President of the United States of America, by His Majesty the King of Great Britain, Ireland and the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, in respect of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and all parts of the British Empire which are not separate members of the League of Nations, of the Dominion of Canada, of the Commonwealth of Australia, of the Dominion of New Zealand, of the Union of South Africa, and of India, and by His Majesty the Emperor of Japan;

 

And the respective ratifications of the said Treaty having been carefully compared and found to be in due form, the said deposit in accordance with the provisions of Article 24(1) of the Treaty took place this day in the customary form.

 

The representative of the United States of America declared that the instrument of ratification of the United States of America was deposited subject to the distinct and explicit understandings set forth in the resolution of 21 July 1930 of the Senate of the United States of America advising and consenting to ratification, that there are no secret files, documents, letters, understandings or agreements which in any way, directly or indirectly, modify, change, add to, or take from any of the stipulations, agreements or statements in said Treaty; and that, excepting the agreement brought about through the exchange of notes between the Governments of the United States, Great Britain and Japan, having reference to Article 19, there is no agreement, secret or otherwise, expressed or implied, between any of the parties to said Treaty as to any construction that shall hereafter be given to any statement or provision contained therein.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF they have signed this procès-verbal, and have affixed thereto their seals.

 

 

DONE at London, the 27th day of October, 1930.

 

 

[signatures not reproduced here.]

 

 

Exchange of Notes between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Japan regarding the Interpretation of Article 19 of the London Naval Treaty of 22 April 1930

 

[Note from the United States Ambassador (Mr Castle), Tokyo, to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan (Baron Shidehara)]

 

 

I

 

Tokyo

 

21 May 1930

 

It is the understanding of the Government of the United States that the word "category" in Article 19 of the London Naval Treaty of 1930 means category or sub-category. The Government of the United States declares that it interprets the Treaty to mean that vessels becoming overage in either sub-category A or sub-category B of the cruiser categories (Article 16) shall be replaceable only in that sub-category.

 

The American Government will be most happy to have the confirmation of this understanding from the Japanese Government.

 

[Note from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan to the United States Ambassador, Tokyo]

 

 

II

[Translation from Japanese language]

 

Tokyo

 

24 May 1930

 

I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your note dated 21 May 1930 relative to the interpretation of the word category appearing in Article 19 of the London Naval Treaty of 1930.

 

The Imperial Government understands the word "category" appearing in Article 19 of the abovementioned Treaty to mean "category" or "sub-category"; thus it interprets this Treaty in the sense that ships belonging to either sub-category A or sub-category B of the cruiser category (Article 16) which shall become overage may be replaced only within that sub-category.

 

 

Exchange of Notes between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the United States of America regarding the Interpretation of Article 19 of the London Naval Treaty of 22 April 1930

 

[Note from the United States Embassy, London, to the British Foreign Office]

 

 

I

 

United States Embassy

London

 

5 June 1930

 

Sir

 

It is the understanding of the Government of the United States that the word "category" in Article 19 of the London Naval Treaty of 1930 means category or sub-category. The Government of the United States declares that it interprets the Treaty to mean that vessels becoming overage of either sub-category A or sub-category B of the cruiser categories (Article 16) shall be replaceable only in that sub-category.

 

I have the honour to state that my Government would be most happy to have a note of confirmation as to whether this interpretation is shared by His Majesty's Government.

 

I have, etc.

 

[signed:]

(For the Ambassador)

 

RAY ATHERTON

Counsellor of Embassy

 

[Note from the British Foreign Office to the United States Embassy, London]

 

 

II

 

Foreign Office

 

5 June 1930

 

Your Excellency

 

In the note which your Excellency was so good as to address to me on 5 June you stated that it was the understanding of the Government of the United States that the word "category" in Article 19 of the London Naval Treaty, 1930, meant category or sub-category. Your Excellency added that the Government of the United States declared that it interpreted the Treaty to mean that vessels becoming overage of either sub-category A or sub-category B of the cruiser categories (Article 16) shall be replaceable only in that sub-category.

 

2. His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom note the above understanding and interpretation of the London Naval Treaty of 1930 and concur therein. His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom do so without prejudice to Article 20(a) of that Treaty under which they understand that the tonnage to be scrapped and replaced in the case of the British Commonwealth of Nations by the 91,000 tons of 6 inch cruiser tonnage which may be completed before 31 December 1936, comprises partly 6-inch-gun cruiser tonnage and partly cruiser tonnage of the 7.5 inch gun "Effingham" class.

 

I have, etc.

 

[signed:]

(For the Secretary of State)

[GravyDave1]

Hope this information helps out some more guys. Had to break it down to 2 parts. Forums would not let me do it all in one post.

[sherman255]

Wow, that is a lot of info lol, but it was a great read! +1 

 

[GravyDave1]

Wow, that is a lot of info lol, but it was a great read! +1 

 

Well I posted these treaty's to help people out. I see a lot of people in debates refer to this treaty's but have it all wrong sometimes.

[_Sarcasticat_]

Great! Thanks for posting, now I won't have to go a-looking on Google for such information...

[GravyDave1]

Great! Thanks for posting, now I won't have to go a-looking on Google for such information...

 

Keep in mind I could not ever detail of the treaty's. But most of them was posted. Hope it helps out.

[Guest]

Good read friend, another excellent thread on a treaty that truly influenced naval history. 

[GravyDave1]

Good read friend, another excellent thread on a treaty that truly influenced naval history. 

 

Thanks Tank Like your new pic too.

[Guest]

 

Thanks Tank Like your new pic too.

 

I've had it for a bit, and I'm looking for a change, but thank you :3, It makes me wonder, what would heavy cruisers look like without the treaty. 

[GravyDave1]

 

I've had it for a bit, and I'm looking for a change, but thank you :3, It makes me wonder, what would heavy cruisers look like without the treaty. 

 

They would exploded for sure. The Alaska's would be a good example of this. Des Moines is another.

[Guest]

 

They would exploded for sure. The Alaska's would be a good example of this. Des Moines is another.

 

We could see many of those types of heavy cruisers come to be...perhaps even 14 inch armed heavy cruisers, similar to the Alaska. 

[GravyDave1]

 

We could see many of those types of heavy cruisers come to be...perhaps even 14 inch armed heavy cruisers, similar to the Alaska. 

 

Well Think if they had 14" guns they would be Battlecruisers. The Battlecruiser Was basically a battleship with less armour. A trade for speed. This was the thinking in WWI to the 1920's. With new designs in Battleships coming out in the 1930's. The speed issue was solved for the battleships. This making Battlecruisers useless. 

[Trainmaster1234]

Good read, hard to see one of these posts these days. 

 

[+1's Intensify]

[GravyDave1]

Good read, hard to see one of these posts these days. 

 

[+1's Intensify]

 

Thanks hope it helps some others out.