WHAT AMENDMENT MEANS

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 79, 30 September 1924, Page 7

WHAT AMENDMENT MEANS

FREEDOM OF ATTACK ON RACIAL ' ISSUES. ! (SYDNEY SUN CABLE.) GENEVA, 28th September. J.he Japanese situation still overshadows the League's activities. A long conversation between M. Bi-iand (France) and Viscount Ishii (Japan)'will probably result in a conference between M. Briand and M. Loucheur (France). Sir Cecil Hurst and Lord "Parmoor (Britain) and Viscount Ishii and Baron Adachi' (Japan). Sir L. E. Groom (Australia), chairman of the First Committee, in which the dispute originated, considers the Japanese amendment to Article 5 withdrawn, and therefore beyond further discussion _ Others hope for a settlement, without involving Japan's withdrawal of her support of the Protocol. Japan also desires to eliminate the clause m Article 6 which declares a nation an aggressor if it attacks aijy other nation over a matter which the International Court has ruled is a domestic problem. This proposal indicates Japans intention to avoid being named as the aggressor in the event of her attacking America oyei- the exclusion of Japanese, or of her interfering with Chinese internal affairs. The deletion of the clause would allow Japan, in a- dispute ovor "\Vhitn Australia," to proceed to attack Australia without immediately becoming an aggressor, although the matter might have been previously ruled by the International Court as domestic, and beyond the League's interference. The Japanese now hint that unanimity will not prevail among the British and Dominions' delegates, owing to India's antagonism to "White AustraJia.