ANGLO-FRENCH CRISIS

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 July 1923, Page 7

ANGLO-FRENCH CRISIS

POINTED BRITISH QUESTIONS AN UNSATISFACTORY REPLY. (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.) LONDON, July 4. The French and Belgian Ambassadors saw Lord Curzon during this afternoon. It is understood that both countries’ replies to the British, questionnaire will be in the British Government’s possession tonight. > The most hopeful result of the conference between Lord Curzon and Count St. **• Aulaire (French Ambassador) is that the conversations are to be continued. Count St. Aulaire did not deliver a. written French reply, or even leave an expected typewritten memorandum. The “Daily Telegraph’s” diplomatic correspondent says, that the conversation was far from being either a full or definite reply to the British questionnaire. Lord Curzon, who evidently was disappointed at the imprecise nature of the verbal elucidation, requested Count St. Aulaire «to ask his Government for additional and more definite particulars. The correspondent gathers that the conversation was primarily concerned with the progressive military evacuation of the Ruhr. I'he British Government desired and expected details of the precess. France was not prepared apparently to go further than to say that the occupation would be intensified, or relaxed, according to Germany’s behaviour. There was a restatement of the principle that the occupation will cease only with the full payment of the French claims. This prompted Lord Curzon to argue that it seemed as if France would never leave, since, by remaining, she was, .in the British view, impairing Germany’s capacity to pay. The “Daily Express” says: Count St. Aulaire emphasised the point that the French could not consent to renew negotiations with Germany, until the passive resistance in the Ruhr is officially discouraged by Berlin and eliminated. ’The “Morning Post” says: “It seems obvious that some of the British Government’s inquiries cannot be answered at any specific moment in black and white by the French Government, whose policy must largely be controlled by the progress of events in the Ruhr and in Germany.” “EXTREMELY DIFFICULT.” LONDON, July 4. Lord Curzon lengthily communicated to the Cabinet his conversations with the French and Belgian Ambassadors. The strictest secrecy is maintained although it is admitted that the situation is extreifiely difficult owing to the , Franco-Belgian tenacious insistence on the cessation of the Germans’ passive , resistance. BELGIAN DETERMINATION. BRUSSELS, July 4. The Premier, M. Theunis, in the Chamber, said the Cabinet would maintain the present Ruhr policy until it obtained satisfaction, and it would persevere in its efforts to re-establish between the Allies that entente which alone would hasten a definite solution. \

DUISBERG OUTRAGE FUNERAL OF VICTIMS. LONDON, July 4. Advices from Dusseldorf state that '■ the Belgian military authorities ordered the closing of every business establishment in Crefeld, on the occasion of the funeral of the nine Belgians bombed in the Duisberg train. They also forbade the Germans to appear in the streets through which the procession passed. Those present included General Degoutte, and Major Barnes of the British Army of Occupation. The processionists marched from the hospital to the church, thence to the station where the coffins were entrained for Belgium. The processionists included little Belgian girls dressed in white and sashes of Belgian colours. Soldiers, railwaymen and others carried hundreds of wreaths. Baron Jacquemyns, the High Commissioner, referred to the cowardly assassination and said that the High Commission would fully support the measures against the pretended passive resistance. GENERAL STRIKE STARTED. BERLIN, June 4. The metal workers have proclaimed a general strike. This it is feared is the beginning of general labour trouble.