CUSTOMS UNION

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 76, 31 March 1931, Page 9

CUSTOMS UNION

AUSTRIA AND GERMANY

NATURAL SUSPICION

BRITAIN TAKES ACTION

HENDERSON EXPLAINS

(British Official Wlroleit.) (Received 31st March, 11 a.m.)' RUGBY, 30th March. ' The Foreign Secretary, Mr. A. Henderson, in the House of Commons 10-day, recounted the course of events and the action taken and contemplated by the British Government regarding the proposed AustroGerman Customs union. He said that the method and .time chosen by the Austrian and German Governments for conveying the information to other interested Governments had rightly provoked widespread comment. He would content himself with saying that the' method was calculated to cause suspicions and nul* lify the advantages for a frank ex« change of ideas offered by the now frequent meetings at ' Geneva and elsewhere between representatives of various Governments. NO HUKRIED DECISION. ' Mr. Henderson said that his initial '• reception given to .various, statement* and memoranda on tho subject whi«h. reached him as he was about to leave for Paris was one of reserve. .It was apparent to him that hurried decisions were not compatible with the natnrft of the case, but-that pointß of law were involved which, demanded .expert advice and mature deliberation. In Paris he found French opinion in * state of very natural perturbation.' After careful consideration he reached the. conclusion that the matter wa« eminently one coming within the competence of the League of Nations. Ae-. cordingly, he decided to inform' th» German and Austrian Governments that . they shoald bo under no misapprehension as to the serious misgivings aroused by their,action in many coun-' tries, and in Prance in particular.Though there might be two opinions at. to the exact conformity of vthe proposed treaty with1 the existing obligations of Austria, and, indeed, of Germany, .the widespread state-of feeling • caused, him great concern, and he felt that if nothing were done1 to calm apprehensions, the task of those anxious that tho . Disarmament Conference should meet under the most favourable conditions would be seriously compromised by any apparent disregard by 'unilateral action or interpretation 'of arty treaty obligations. ' • ■ REPRESENTATIONS MADE. He caused these considerations'to be submitted to the German-and Austrian • Chancellors with all, the emphasis which circumstances, in • his opinion, demanded, and appealed to them that, before they proceeded further, opportunity should bo given to tho League Council, under whoso,auspices the Protocol of 1922 was negotiated, to assure itself that tho proposed treaty was not contrary to the obligations undertaken by Austria in that instrument. He informed M. Briand at once of the action he had taken, and M. Briandassured him that the procedure he contemplated would fully meet the view of tho French Government. REPLIES RECEIVED. , On the following day, 26th March,' he received the reply of tlie Austrian Government. It .was to the effect that^ they were of opinion that tho proposed ' agreement was quite in conformity with the. Geneva Protocol of 1922. They did not object to the legal aspect of if being examined by the Governments.[which signed the Geneva Pro-' tocol. To examine the agreement from a political standpoint would, v however, bo out of question considering its economic character. The Austrian Government had had no intention of facing other Governments with, a fait' accompli. The German Government replied that the Austro-Gcrman agreement was entirely within the framework of th« Geneva Protocol of 4th October, 1922. Therefore in their opinion there was no reason why tho- League Council' should take up the matter. The two Governments had nothing to fear if other Governments proceeded to the examination of the judicial aspect of * the question, but the German Government could not admit an examination ■ of tho agreement by the League Council from a political standpoint, as th« agreement was of- a purely economic character. The negotiations would nat-. urally have to take their course, a'ni having regard to tho. numerous technical details which had .to be.' settled, could not be concluded' before two of. threo months-had elapsed. l OPEN TO QUESTION. Mr. Henderson said that he regarded the Austrian answer as less open to the question than the German answer, which might bo held to imply that an examination of the juridical aspect of tho question would have to be con-1 ducted without their co-operation, and expressed the intention of continuing negotiations with Austria in the mean* ' time. ■ ' Thinking that the German Government had perhaps misapprehended his' suggestion he telegraphed to Berlin on. 26tli March, saying that his suggestion had been simply to the effect that before the two Governments proceeded, further opportunity should be given tho League Council to assuro that th» proposed treaty was not contrary to th» Protocol of 1922. It was possible that tho Council would be reluctant to -pro-' nounco on so technical and juridical a question without an opinion from* the Governments concerned.