DRASTIC DECREE

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 111, 11 May 1923, Page 7

DRASTIC DECREE

FOR CONTROL OF THE

SAAR

COMMENT IN THE HOUSE OR

COMMONS

(UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION.—COp-JRIGHT.)

(AUSTRALIAN . NBW ZEAMND CABLE ASSOCIAITON.)

(Received 11th May, 11 a.m.)

LONDON, 11th May.

Sir John Simon, in the House of Commons, raised the queßfcion of the Council of the League of Nations' decree in regard to the Saax Valley. He characterised the decree as extraordinary and a most astonishing abuse of legislative authority. The decree provided punishment not exceeding five -years' imprisonment and a fine not exceeding 10,000 francs for any person publicly casting discredit on the Treaty of Versailles or insulting the League of Nations. Sir John wished to know what the Government proposed to do to stop such proceedings exposing the League to contempt and derision. Mr. E. F. L. Wood, in reply, said the originally difficult position in the Saar hod been immensely complicated by the political reactions following the occupation of the Ruhr. He had been advised that, from a strictly legal sta»dpoint, the Saar Commission had not gone be- j yond its Treaty rights. The decree did not require the approval or confirmation I of the Council, and was justified by the. chairman of the Commission on „ the ground that the condition of opinion in the Saar Pve3s, which, was subsidised by Germany, was dangerous. Personally, Mr. Wood mads no secret of his dislike for the decree, and he questioned its wisdom. What the Government now proposed was an impartial inquiry through the League's machinery, into the general question of the Saar administration. They would communicate with the States who were members v of the Council, arid upon their replies future action would depend. Mr. H. H. Asquith (L.) said that there was no complaint at the Minister's ac-. tio nat the Council, but the decree was a serious matter, affecting the prestige and moral authority of the League of Nations. One might ransack the records of the Russian treatment of Poland without finding a more monstrous specimen of despotic legislation or one more oppressive, of the ordinary elementary rights of free citizenship. Lord Robert Cecil (C.) said the decree was thoroughly bad in principle, and ought to be withdrawn immediatel}'. The Council of the League should be summoned at once.

Mr. H. A.L. Fisher (NX.), said the League of Nations should discuss the Ruhr, where the situation was becoming more dangerous every hour.

Mr. E. D. Morel. (Lab.) mentioned that France did not want Germany to get on her feet again. She meant to disrupt German industry.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer was recently asked whether the League of Nations Council in March adopted a proposal to issue a decree by the League, as the responsible body under the Versailles Treaty for the administration of the Saar Valley,' making it an offence punishable by fine or imprisonment to criticise" publicly the Treaty, of Versailles or the action of the League, and what action the British representatives took. Mr. Baldwin replied that the statement was substantially correct..