FRENCH DECLARATION

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 165, 31 March 1923, Page 5

FRENCH DECLARATION

CAUSES SENSATION IN GERMANY BRITISH ATTITUDE DISCUSSED POSSIBILITY OF MEDIATION The French Premier’s declaration that evacuation of the Ruhi- will only be considered when the reparations question is solved, has caused a sensation in the occupied territory. The British attitude on the matter has been discussed in the House of Commons, when reference was made to the possibility of mediation. BY TELEGRAPH—FREIS ASSOCIATION, —COPYRIGHT.

(Rec. March 30, 5.5 p.m.) London, March 28. The Cologne correspondent of the “Daily Express” says that M. Poincare’s recent speech caused a sensation throughout occupied Germany. His declaration that the pledges would not be given up till payment was made has been taken to infer that France intends to permanently control the Ruhr railways and the east bank of the Rhine.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.

[M. Poincare, the French Premier, speaking at a meeting of the Finance Commission, admitted that the economic results of the Ruhr occupation so far wej-e not important, owing to difficulties encountered through Germany’s policy of unwillingness. Only a prolonged occupation would enable France to solve the problem. France would not listen to proposals from neutral or Allied sources. He felt certain that no Allied country would make such proposals. Evacuation of the Ruhr would only be considered when the reparations question was solved.] SECRET CUSTOMS BUREAU FOUND IN PRIVATE HOUSE Dusseldorf, March 28 The French discovered a secret German Customs Bureau in a private house. They arrested 25 officials found there, and also a German shopkeeper, who had come to. pay taxes to Germany instead of tt> France.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn. FRENCH ORDER DISOBEYED HEAVY SENTENCE ON GERMAN RAILWAYMEN (Rec. March 30, 5.5 p.m.) Berlin, March 29. The chief railway inspector, Ludwig Shafen, has been sentenced to twenty years’- imprisonment for refusing to obey a French order to intercept an unscheduled train, which was subsequently derailed. —Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn. BRITISH ATTITUDE RELATIONS WITH FRANCE AND GERMANY HOUSE OF COMMONS DISCUSSION (Rec. March 29, 5.5 p.m.) London, March 28. % Sir Edward Grigg (National Liberal), who resumed "the debate in the House of Commons on the Consolidated Fund Bill, raised the question of Franco-German and Franco-British re- , lations on the Ruhr occupation. The I serious dislocation of our trade was I being caused, he said, by the French '

occupation during the past few months. We had now passed into a new phase of French policy, where neither reparations nor security occupied the centre of the stage. We had always agreed with tho French on the question of repaiMtions, but differed as to methods. If France’s mind was centred on reparations she would have adopted a different attitude on the Bankers’ Conference proposals and those offered by the British Government. The present central . motive •was not the old form of security, but was security under an entirely new definition which took us into a dangerous volcaniq region. The new policy meant the ’denationalisation of tho German people, and would result in an inevitable explosion in the years to come. It was contrary to our declared war aims and to the Treaty of Versailles. It would cause future wars and our inevitable interference in the international affairs of European States, which had never been undertaken before. He urged that the Government should consult the Dominions forthwith on the whole issue.

Sir L. Worthington Evans (Conservative) asked what steps were being taken to remove the suspicion which had. given rise to ihe tension between France and Britain, and for which there was no ground. France suspected that we stood in the way of her getting reparations, but, on the con- . trary, we had supported her in every practical proposal. It was also a fallacy to think that we were depriving her of tho security to which she was entitled. ' The position between France and Britain was go serious that every possible information ought to be given, and he suggested that papers relating to last August’s conference should be published. Mr. H. H. Asquith said he regarded the situation as grave and disquieting. He contended that France had received adequate securities against the responsibilities of future danger from Germany. It was no use blinking the fact that the Ruhr invasion would create a new Alsace Lorraine for an indefinite time. He hoped that the Government would strive its hardest to re-establish the entente with France. Mr. Ramsay MacDonald (leader of the Labour Party) contended that the Government’s position of benevolent neutrality was no position at all. The Allies could not get substantial reparations unless the economic and political position of Germany was changed and an international loan was made possible. , The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. S. Baldwin), in replying, assured the House that the Government was keeping in touch w-ith the Dominions on the matter, and would continub to do so. He said that France at present appeared to be singularly unwilling to accept any kind of intervention. This resulted in presenting a door banged, bolted, and barred against the ordinary methods of_ai> preach, which at ordinary times might lead to a settlement. The Opposition had suggested reference of the matter to the League of Nations, together with many other methods, which had already been explored. The Government was firmly convinced that hith- , erto it had pursued the only course ' Britain ought to take. Britain had preserved the confidence, trust,. and friendship of her Allies. He believed that when the time'came we would ba accepted by Germany as honest negotiators. He saw nothing at present which should induce us to step aside from the path which had hitherto been trodden. —Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn. .. ’I