ARMAMENT LIMITATION

Evening Star, Issue 19520, 30 March 1927, Page 5

ARMAMENT LIMITATION

THE GENEVA MEETING QUESTION OF STANDING ARMIES LORD CECIL ADMITS FAILURE. (British Official News.) Press Association—By Wireless—Copyright. RUGBY, March 23. Following speeches made by the French and Belgian delegates at today’s meeting at Geneva of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, Lord Cecil said lie recognised that his arguments had failed. . The French and _ Belgian delegates maintained tho position that it was impossible to limit the numbers of the annual contingent, and that the nations represented needed to train their whole manhood. Lord Cecil, in reply, said he advocated a limitation of the numbers and a limitation of tho period of service. Some of the delegates adopted the view that it was impossible to limit the annual contingent, ami that it was unthinkable that a system of ballots should, be introduced; but he understood that in tho system of conscription there was a standard by which certain numbers were rejected, and if it were desired to reduce tho contingent all that was necessary was to raise tho qualifications. He understood that before the war the German Government only recruited 60 per cent, of its annual contingent. According to tho Belgian representative, the States required the whole of their population for the defence of their country, if that were so that was an end of the argument, and there was no point in discussing methods of limitation. Lord Cecil concluded by saying that he had done his best, and ho recognised that he had failed. He had not succeeded m shaking tho convictions of any of those who supported tho opposite thesis. The committee could settle nothing except by unanimity. He could not impose his ideas on the rest, and it was evidently useless for him to persist in attempting to establish his point of view, though ho still maintained that he was right.

GERMANY’S ATTITUDE,

Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright

BERLIN, March 29. Dr Gesslcr (Minister of Defence), speaking in the Reichstag, favored Germany entering into a general discussion upon disarmament, but Germany could not tolerate being x*educed to the defenceless state of the American Indian. She must insist on general disarmament on tho linos of German dis armament.

5,,» TRAINED RESERVES

BRITISH PROJECT NOT FAVORED.

GENEVA, March 29

Speaking at tho Disarmament Conference, Count Bernsdorff said that the German delegation would nob consider a convention which excluded the trained reserves. Ho agreed with Belgium that it was impossible to abolish conscription in Continental countries. Mr Sato, on behalf of Japan, pointed out that tho British scheme sought to limit not only the regulars, but the trained reserves. Japan considered that they could limit only the annual contingents called to the colors. Mr Gibson (United States) supported the French rather than the British project.

DIVIDED OPINION

GENEVA, March 29,

(Received March JO, at 9.30 a.ra.) The Disarmament Commission is stijl sharply divided regarding limiting military effectives. Only Germany and Sweden support the British project to reduce tho annual contingents called to the colors. France, Belgium, and Japan are willing to reduce tho period of service, but insist on maintaining universal conscription. The Belgian delegation agued that it would be a most unfortunate form of disarmament to abolish conscription unless the world were able to give Europe tho same security as tho more fortunate isolated democracies had secured. The Italians opposed any limitation of trained reserves by limiting annual contingents. Count Bernstorff, on behalf of Germany, said that he was in favor of the British plan of limiting reserves.