ANTI-WAR PACT

Greymouth Evening Star, 26 June 1928, Page 5

ANTI-WAR PACT

NEW NOTE’S RECEPTION

BRITISH JURIST’S CRITICISM

(Australian Press Assn. —United Service.) (By Cable—Press Assn—Copyright.)

LONDON, June 25.

Sir Frederic Pollock, ICC., (Professor of Jurisprudence at Oxford), commenting on Mr Kellogg’s Note, says that M. Briand would like to have defined the necessary reservations of self defence, whereas Mr Kellogg would like to leave them to be implied. Sir F. Pollock also asks whether Mr Kellogg has reflected that the implied exceptions may turn out to be wider than would expressed ones. »

The “Daily Telegraph” expresses the opinion that Mr Kellogg has shown much tact and good sense in his new Note, remarking: “It will be observed that Mr Kellogg makes no reference to Sir Austen Chamberlain’s observations respecting regions of special vital interest to the British Empire. Mr Kellogg’s silence can only be interpreted to mean that he recognises these facts as clearly as we do.”

A FRENCH WELCOME.

LONDON, June 25.

“The Times’s” Paris correspondent says: Mr Kellogg’s Note has been hailed with satisfaction in France, especially the clause releasing the signatories in the event of aggression, thus enabling the bringing in to the League of Nations Covenant of all agreements against an aggressor. It is regretted that this Clause is placed in the preamble, instead of being embodied in the Pact. The latter is preferable, because it would prevent any possible misunderstanding.