OUTLAWRY OF WAR

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 191, 15 May 1928, Page 9

OUTLAWRY OF WAR

ADOPTION OF AMERICAN PLAN PREDICTED NOT INIMICAL TO LEAGUE

WORLD PEACE IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT WASHINGTON

(United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) (Australian I'ress Association.)

London, May 13.

Mr. J. L. Garvin, writing in the “Observer,” after Sir Austen Chamberlain’s speech, says: “No doubt the American plan for the outlawry of war will be carried. France and our other European and Asian friends ought to realise that our Continental League policy is unconditionally subordinate to the fundamental principle of unambiguous Anglo-American friendship. In no possible contingency could we join anyone in hostilities against the United States. Tile first such shot would dissolve the Empire. Mr. Kellogg's plan is in no way inimical to the League. We look to France to secure the success of the, Six-Power Pact. Any peace system with the United States is far stronger than any other- minus American .support. We can no more secure world peace at Geneva without Washington than we can irrigate .’ill the world's deserts witli the parish pump.”

SATISFACTION IN UNITED STATES AND FRANCE

AT CHAMBERLAIN’S STATEMENT (British OlHcial Wireless.) Rugby, May J 3. Sir Austen Chamberlain’s Parliamentary statement regarding the British attitude towards the renunciation of war pact and his forecast of the British reply, which, if the Dominions approve, will be sent to Washington, are reported to have created much satisfaction both in the United states and France.

Mr. J. R. Clynes, Labour M.P., speaking yesterday to the Labour Party, gave the warmest welcome to Sir Austen Chamberlain’s statement on the American peace pact proposals. He continued: “The proposal is not a displacement of League principles. It supplements them in a form more readily understood, and the welcome given in the House of Commons this week is the most hopeful thing which has happened in recent years. It brings us to the threshold of a new era.’ 1 Mr. Clynes added that heavy armament burdens would be inconsistent with the proposal, and the nations would have to accept a disarmament policy if insincerity were to be avoided.