OUTLAWING WAR

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 84, 7 January 1928, Page 9

OUTLAWING WAR

MR. KELLOGG’S PROPOSALS CHANGE IN FRENCH SENTIMENT ’ WORLD PACT NOT IMPLIED Fre’nch opinion concerning Mr. Kellogg’s arbitration pact proposals has undergone a change as a result of study of the text of the American Secretary of State’s Note, and the proposals are now regarded with favour, it being considered that a world pact is not aimed at, as implied in the original summary.

By Telegraph.—Press Association.—Copyright.

(Ree. January 6, 8.50 p.m.) Paris, January 5. French opinion on Mr. Kellogg’s proposals has changed. The proposals are now regarded even with favour. The change is the result of a study of the full text, from which it does not appear that Mr. Kellogg wishes to replace the Pact bet wen France and the United States by a world Pact, as the summary seemed to imply. “Le Temps” says: “There is no objection in principle to the United States opening negotiations with other Powers entirely distinct from the Franco-American negotiations. The onlv essential is that the Pacts should harmonise with the Geneva Conference, to which Mr. Kellogg’s proposals may bring the United States nearer. She for the first time is willing to unite with the Powers which made themselves guardians of the peace.” The "Journal des Debats” says : "Wg must always encourage any initiative against war from Washington.” UNMIXED SATISFACTION IN WASHINGTON AT CHANGE OF SENTIMENT (Rec. January 6, 9.20 p.m.) Washington, January 5. The seeming shift of sentiment in French Government circles in favour of the principle of the American proposal for a multilateral treaty renouncing war is accepted in official circles here to-dav with unmixed satisfaction. Whatever reactions France might have -towards the plan, so far as the League of Nations or treaties with European States are concerned, it is believed that the Poincare Government could not afford to be placed in a false light by outright immediate rejection. Some changes in the Kellogg plan may be suggested as a result of French,Cabinet deliberation, and if so these will be received in the spirit of accommodation. ’ The State'Department has indicated that it is prepared to consider sympathetically any amendments of the proposal it has made. SUBSTANCE OF KELLOGG’S PROPOSALS ARBITRATION IN CASES OF DISPUTE PROVIDED FOR IN LEAGUE COVENANT Rugby, January 5. The text has been-communicated to the Foreign Office of. the reply which Mr. Kellogg (the United States Secretary of State) has made to the French Government proposal of last June for a “Pact of perpetual friendship between France and the United States.” In-this reply Mr. Kellogg proposes, firstly, the enlargement of the Arbitration 'Treaty of 1908—which requires renewal next month in the case of France and in June irt the case of Great Britain—and, secondly, that the United States and Fiance should’ sponsor a “Treaty among the principal countries of the world, open to signature by allnations, condemning war and renouncing it as an instrument of national policy in favour of a pacific settlement of international disputes.” The _ text of the i American communication is reproduced in the Press. The French Foreign Minister (M. Briand) has sent a reply, in which he is, understood to have expressed satisfaction that liis own proposal “to outlaw’ war” should have received the United States’ approval, and adding that if the treaty now proposed by Washington is to be open to other Nations it would require to be. carefully studied in order that the rights and duties of; nations which are parties to the League Covenant may not be prejudiced. M. Briand is stated also to have requested more detailed information regarding the form in which, it is . proposed to renew the Arbitration Treaty, and as to the position which would arise in the' event of the United States Senate refusing to ratify it after its Signature. ATTITUDE OF BRITISH PRESS. In London, official comment is withheld upon the United States’ communication pending its careful study. The newspapers generally express satisfaction that America should 'thus be “talking the language of peace,” pointing out at the same time that the League of Nations owes its very existence to a similar inspiration. The principle, it is recalled, is expressed in Article 12 of the League Covenant, by which members agree'to submit any dispute likely to lead to rupture either to arbitration or to judicial settlement, or to inquiry by the League Council, and not to resort , to war until three months after the award.

At the League Assembly last September a unanimous vote for outlaying war was also carried. It ran;— Firstly, that all war is and remains prohibited. Secondly, that all pacific means must be employed for the settlement of disputes, no matter of what nature, that may arise among the various States. Members of the League of Nations are under an obligation to conform to these principles. The newspapers await with particular interest the text of the proposed Treaty of Arbitration to replace the terms of the Root Treaty of 1908.—British Official Wireless. WAR PERMITTED BY LEAGUE COVENANT BRITAIN COMMITTED TO SANCTIONS POINTS REQUIRING CLARIFICATION London, January 5. Mr. Kellogg’s Note has been formally handed to the British Foreign Office, which at present is not commenting upon it. Official quarters broadly approve of the proposals and believe that a 'multilateral treaty would not cut across the League Covenant, though much depends on the text. But it is pointed out that the Government, in certain circumstances, permits, and even commands, war. Furthermore, in certain limited circumstances, like those defined in the Treaty of Locarno, Britain is committed to sanctions, which America does not mention. Therefore, till these points are cjarified there is no prospect of any official British communication. Britain may be directly linked up with the discussions when the proposed enlargement of the Root Arbitration Treaties, expiring in June, is considered. FRANCE’S OBLIGATION TO LEAGUE Paris, January 5. The most interesting development hitherto is Cabinet’s instructions to the Ambassador at Washington to make, a specific reservation safeguarding France’s obligation to the League in the event of a war of defence against art aggressor nation. DECLARATION AGAINST WAR A LOOPHOLE London, January 5. Professor Gilbert Murray, a former chairman of the League of Nations Union, says that America’s proposal and the League’s resolution declaring war a crime are equally weak, in the sense that every nation could glibly agree till a crisis arose, when it would say that war was being thrust upon it. If America can devise a treaty completely outlawing war, Professor Murray says he is confident that it will be enthusiastically accepted by all nations.