Captain Crozier recalls the conditions under which this technical committee operated. The members took part in the work, not as delegates of Governments, but as mandataries of the subcommission in their individual technical capacity. He opposes the proposition of Mr. BELDIMAN.

Messrs. Baron Bildt and Abdullah Pasha expressed themselves in the same way as Captain CROZIER.

The President puts the proposition of Mr. BELDIMAN to a vote, and it is adopted by 12 votes to 10, with one abstention.

Captain Mahan, on behalf of the United States delegation, makes the following declaration :

The delegation of the United States of America have concurred in the conclusions upon the first clause of the Russian letter of December 30, 1898, presented to the Conference by the First Commission, namely, that the proposals of the Russian representatives for fixing the amounts of effective forces and of military and naval budgets, for periods of five and three years can not now be accepted, and that a more profound study upon the part of each State concerned is to be desired. But, while thus supporting what seemed to be the only practicable solution of a question submitted to the Conference by the Russian letter, the delegation wishes to place upon the record that the United States, in so doing, does not express any opinion as to the course to be taken by the States of Europe.

This declaration is not meant to indicate mere indifference to a difficult problem, because it does not affect the United States immediately, but expresses a determination to refrain from enunciating opinions upon matters into which, as concerning Europe alone, the United States has no claim to enter.

The words drawn up by Mr. BOURGEOIS, and adopted by the First Commission, received also the hearty concurrence of this delegation, because in so doing it expresses the cordial interest and sympathy with which the United States, while carefully abstaining from anything that might resemble interference, regards all movements that are thought to tend to the welfare of Europe.

The military and naval armaments of the United States are at present so small, relatively to the extent of territory and to the number of the population, as well as in comparison with those of other nations, that their size can entail no additional burden of expense upon the latter, nor can even form a subject for profitable mutual discussion.

[40] The third part of the report is accepted by the Commission.

The fourth part of the report is adopted without discussion.

His Excellency Mr. Staal proposes to express to the reporter the thanks of the Commission for all the trouble he has taken. (Assent.)

The meeting adjourns.

EIGHTH MEETING

JULY 20, 1899

Jonkheer van Karnebeek presiding.

The minutes of the previous meeting are read and adopted.

The President says that the discussion of Parts I and III of the report, which have been modified in accordance with the decisions of the Commission, must be resumed.

The reporter, Mr. van Karnebeek, says that the remark has been made to him that the vote relating to the prohibition of projectiles whose sole purpose is to spread asphyxiating gases was given unanimously with the exception of one voice, and that six votes of the majority were in the affirmative only on condition of there being unanimity. He recognizes that this is true, but nevertheless he makes an urgent appeal to the United States delegation. This delegation will be the judge of the situation and will see whether it should maintain its negative vote and thereby prevent unanimity from being obtained.

Captain Mahan says he is afraid to begin the discussion again. He would have liked to reserve that until the plenary session of the Conference. He speaks in the name of the United States delegation, which adopted a resolution on general principles and does not deem it logical to permit the use of submarine and submergible boats and to prohibit the use of shells filled with asphyxiating gases. It is impossible for him to reverse his original vote, because it is a question of principle.

The Reporter thinks it is better to come to a conclusion now in Commission than to return to the question in Conference.

Not having succeeded in modifying the stand of the United States delegation, the only thing remaining is to change point 2 of Part I by adding at the end "but of the majority, six votes were in the affirmative only on condition of there being unanimity."

Count de Macedo, after stating that he made a mistake in the preceding meeting when he thought that the word "sole" was not in the text relating to point 2, explains that he voted "yea" in order not to depart from the almost unanimous concert on a very secondary matter, although he is convinced that the use of the word "sole" has the effect of taking all the force away from the proposed prohibition and even of causing certain resolutions of the Conference to be regarded in a less favorable light.

A discussion participated in by Captain Mahan, Colonel Gilinsky, Mr. Beldiman, Captain Scheine, Colonel Coanda, and the Reporter is begun on the question whether the last paragraph of Part I shall be maintained.

Following observations presented by his Excellency Count Nigra, Mr. Raffalovich, Mr. Motono, Count de Macedo, Mr. Beldiman, and Mr. Miyato

vitch, it is decided that the Commission shall propose to the Conference a declaration or a convention on each point separately.

[41] Being consulted on the three points, the Commission unanimously votes on the first one.

On the second point, by 17 votes (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Denmark, Spain, France, Italy, Japan [on condition of unanimity], Montenegro, Netherlands, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Serbia, Siam, Switzerland, Turkey, Bulgaria); against two (United States and Great Britain)..

On the third point by 16 votes (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Denmark, Spain, France, Italy, Japan, Montenegro, Netherlands, Roumania, Russia, Serbia, Siam, Switzerland, Turkey, Bulgaria); against two (United States and Great Britain); and one abstention (Portugal).

The President says that account will be taken in the report of the decisions which have just been reached.

The PRESIDENT states that the first part is thus settled.

Part III is adopted after substituting the words "with the exception of Colonel GILINSKY" in place of the words " without counting Colonel GILINSKY, author of the proposition."

The President declares the report adopted; he adds that the labors of the Commission are terminated, and at this juncture he asks that the Bureau be allowed to prepare the minutes of this meeting, which will be the last.

The meeting adjourns.

(Assent.)

[42]

FIRST SUBCOMMISSION

FIRST MEETING

MAY 26, 1899

His Excellency Mr. Beernaert presiding.

The President observes that the fundamental question submitted to the examination of the first subcommission may be expressed in the following words:

Should we conventionally waive the right to use any new improvement in the art of war and forbid the adoption in armies and navies of any new firearms and new explosives, as well as of more powerful powders than those now adopted both for guns and cannon?

General den Beer Poortugael wonders whether it would be possible to waive the right absolutely to use any invention which might come up. This would be very difficult, for a new invention may effect savings, instead of causing new expenses. In case of an international understanding, the Netherlands would very willingly join in.

Colonel Gilinsky makes known a proposition according to which the Imperial Government, deeming that the gun now in use in all armies is of about the same caliber and quality, proposes the fixing of a term, to be determined upon, during which the guns now in service shall not be replaced by others. Automatic guns exist at present only as a proposition and have not been adopted anywhere. It is not a question of defending new inventions, but of fixing for a certain time the present type without precluding improvements which would not radically change them and which would not transform the present gun into an automatic gun.

The object of this proposition is to prevent new expenses.

Captain Ayres d'Ornellas asks whether this prohibition has in view only the guns and cannon in use, or whether it applies likewise to firearms which are in progress of adoption.

The President supposes that nations which are behindhand could come up to date with the others.

According to Colonel Gilinsky the gun is about the same in all the armies. The improvement of the present type is permitted, the only thing under consid-. eration at present being the gun itself.

Captain Ayres d'Ornellas defines the question. It is true that the gun is about the same in the different European armies, but the caliber differs, ranging between six and eight millimeters.