PACT OF THE PACIFIC.

Auckland Star, Volume LII, Issue 304, 22 December 1921, Page 5

PACT OF THE PACIFIC.

MATTER OF INTERPRETATION. INCLUSION OP Japan, IN ISLANDS OF PACIFIC. (By Cable.—Press Association. —Oopyrlght.) (Received 10.30 a.m.) LONDON, December 21. The White House issued the following statement to-night: When the President was responding to Press inquiries to-day he.expressed the opinion that the homeland of Japan did not come within the words "Insular possessions and Dominions", of the four-party agreement. This expression has been emphasised as a division between the President and the delegation. The President announced to-night that a difference in view would in no wise be permitted to embarrass the conference or ratification of the agreement. He assumed all along that the spirit of the conference contemplates confidence which pledges respect to territory in every way which tends to promote lasting peace. He ' has learned from the United States delegates that they have agreed on a construction which includes the homeland of Japan in the term "Insular possessions and Dominions" and he has no objection to that construction.— (A. and N.Z. Cable.) TREATY A MORAL PLEDGE. EOR FRIENDLY CONSULTATION JAPAN PLAYING HER PART. (Received 10.30 a.m.) WASHINGTON, December 21. Prince Tokugawa, in a speech to-day, said that the opposition in Japan to the accomplishments of the Washington Conference was negligible, and continued: "You will find Japan playing her part in peace so long as she need not fear an assault on her own independence or dangerous aggression to the security of China, which is vital to her. Critics of the Four-Power Treaty seem to be trying to read into its very plain terms some moral pledge binding the nations to go to war, but that interpretation is far-fetched. The treaty is a moral pledge that the four Powers will consult one another in a friendly manner to maintain the general peace of the Pacific, it goes without saying that if the conference occurred in any other capital but Washington it would not have gone so fast or so far. You Americans are certainly speedy, but we Japanese had no intention of letting you leave us behind." After recounting the accomplishments of the conference, Prince Tokugawa added: "We have all but concluded an agreement between China and Japan on the Shantung question. These agreements would not have been possible if •Japan's spirit had not been in fullest accord with those of other nations. It shows how unfair it was to charge Japan wkh possessing a militaristic spirit."—(A. and N.Z. Special.) OPPOSITION IN JAPAN. A HALF-HEARTED POLICY. (Received 10.30 a.m.) TOKYO, December 21. The Opposition party held a meeting at which was outlined a line of opposition ft'hich will be taken against the Four-Power Treat)'. One leader asked whether the Occidental Powers did pot contemplate using the treaty as a wedge into Far Eastern affairs. Other speakers questioned the Government's lack of insight into the Washington Conference constituting a menace to Japan's special position in the Far East. Other individuals discounted valueless criticism in view of the fact that the Far Eastern discussions in Washington were not yet completed, and added that the abrogation of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance and the ratification of the Four-Power Pact would benefit all concerned. — (A. and NZ. Cable.) INTERPRETATION OF THE PACT JAPAN'S HOME ISLANDS. ARE THEY INCLUDED. WASHINGTON, December 21. France's attitude to the naval ratio has had an unexpected result in the Senate, where a feeling of irritation over what are considered to be unreasonable demands has reacted to produce antagonism to any international pact. Opponents of the Pacific Treaty for the first time are becoming hopeful of defeating the agreement. Another interesting point in connection with this pact is'the fact that the much-debated inclusion therein _of Japan's mainland was due to Australian initiative. Mr. G. F. Pearce insisting that it would be derogatory to Australian national pride to have Japan itself excepted while Australia was included as a country under the protection of the four Powers. White House and the State Department seem to be at variance over the interpretation of the pact. Presidential circles to-day let it be known that they did not consider that the treaty applied to the islands of Japan proper any more than to the American mainland. They were careful to add that they spoke subject to correction apd with reserve. This interpretation is in direct contradiction to tmblic assertions made by both American and British delegates, most of whom at one time or another have declared emphatically that the provisions of the treaty are applicable to the Japanese home islands, as well as outlying possessions. The Japanese delegates likewise have said that they consider the treaty in the same way. The Presidential announcement, however, classes the islands of Japan proper as those of a party to / the pact and, as such, distinct from islands and possessions. Interesting developments are to be exuected, adding fuel to the local controversy and increasing Senatorial attention to the treaty. It was revealed this afternoon during discussions on the Pacific treaty that it was clearly understood that the mainland of Japan was included, though at j ~no stiiL-r-' rook the point that she I ought not to '->•• included whrn 'Prilain ami ihr> Unite.', States wore not. j This squares with the earlipr report that Australian representations caused Japan's inclusion. ' .