NO SOLUTION YET

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 167, 11 April 1932, Page 9

NO SOLUTION YET

Danubian Problems LONDON CONFERENCE - / Little Definite Advance ’ / (Rec. April 9, 5.5 p.m.) Offlclal Wlreleo. Rugby, April 8. The final meeting o£ the Four Power Conference' was held at the Foreign Office this morning, and a communique issued later stated that the Government’s represented, France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom, were agreed that the financial and economic situation of the Danubian countries requires prompt and concerted action on the parts both of the Danubian States and of other countries if it is to be put on a sound basis, and that such action is in the interests of, and may be the first step toward the economic restoration of Europe. As a result of the deliberations of the Conference a number of economic points emerged calling for further examination and information. As next week’s resumed meeting of the Disarmament Conference , and the meeting of the League Council at Geneva would prevent immediate continuance of the present discussions, each of the four Governments agreed to address to the other three as soon as possible a considered statement of its views on points reserved and on the best mode of further advance. This decision will at once be put into effect by the British Government. The condition of the Danubian States, particularly of Austria and Hungary, has been a cause of anxiety here for some months. Practical measures for easing the situation have been under constant examination since January and assistance by means of loans is already forthcoming. Disappointment in Britain. British Ministers do not disguise their disappointment that the Four Power Conference has not marked a more definite advance in further measures for the assistance of which the Danubian States stand in need, but they do not regard the result, as entirely discouraging. Already their observations resulting from recent study of the problem, together with points which have emerged during this weeek’s conversations, are being correlated. They will be supplemented by further detailed information ahd embodied In the statement of policy to be sent in due course to the other three Powers. The British Government still believes that the most practical course Is for the Danubian States to seek agreement amongst themselves and for the Great Powers to consider together the most appropriate measures of assistance and guidance. It also takes the view that if a peginning could be obtained for this group idea It would speedily develop into a system of mutual help with great benefit to the cause of European restoration. The Government has. nevertheless, maintained an open mind and will readily consider any proposal that promises the desired results. Points of Difference. The question of waiving temporarily the most-favoured nations rights is one of the points on which differences occurred,, and it must be considered in future discussions. At least one of the Powers represented was unable to give a definite reply to such a proposal, but it has not been definitely abandoned. The Conference also showed tljat the complex' question of differentiation in the scale of preferences as between different classes-of goods exchanged among Danubian States raised issues upon which further examination Is necessary. ■The fact that there was no lack of good-will or determination to reacli a solution has encouraged the Conference delegates to hope that as a result of further exchanges of views now to be undertaken by other means a practical policy may yet be evolved. GERMAN OBJECTIONS Viewpoints Irreconcilable NATIONS’ TRADING RIGHTS London, April 8. it is clear that the Four Bower Conference Is ending because the' French and Italo-Gcrman viewpoints are irreconcilable. Dr. von Bulow declared that Czechoslovakia had no need of financial assistance, which Austria, Hungary, and Bulgaria needed urgently, and Ruma-, nla and Yugoslavia decidedly less urgently. Mutual preferences among Danubian States had been tried and failed. Germany’s exclusion from a preferential system would result in Czecho-slovakla supplanting German Industry. France and Britain might be willing to waive the most-favoured-nation clause Since they did little business/wlth the Danube States, Britain exporting ten million sterling worth per annum, while Germany exported sixty millions sterling worth. Germany was prepared to grant unilateral preference to Hungary, Yugo-. slavia, Rumania, and Bulgaria iu respect to their agricultural exports and offered Austria unilateral preference both on her agricultural and industrial exports. Ho invited the other Powers to follow this example. When Dr. von Bulow concluded, observing that the French and German proposals were mutually destructive, the members of the conference realised that a solution was at present impracticable.

The “Daily Express” states that the conference crashed over the refusal of Germany and Italy to sacrifice their trading rights without compensation. In the background was the German suspicion that the French proposal was Intended to block tho possibility of a revival of the plan of an Austro-Ger-man Customs union.

The French .correspondent of’ the “Daily Telegraph” states that French quarters regard Germany’s objections ns really political. She fears the closing of the Danube countries against Germanic influence and economic penetration. Mr. Ramsay MacDonald at tho close of the proceedings intimated that the failure of the scheme for a preferential tariff meant a loss of financial assistance to the States.