DISARMAMENT EFFORTS

Greymouth Evening Star, 17 May 1934, Page 7

DISARMAMENT EFFORTS

LAB. DEPUTATION’S REQUEST IMPORTANCE OF LEAGUE [OFFICIAL WIRELESS.] RUGBY, May 15. The Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary received a. joint deputation from Trade Union Congress and tho Labour Party, who presented a resolution on disarmament, and the work of the League, representing the considered views of the National Joint Council of the British Labour movement. Among other points, the resolution urged the Government to take all pos-

sible steps to bring Soviet Russia and the United States into doser association with the League, upon the basis of the Pact of Paris. It stated that the National Joint Council would warmly welcome an indication that Soviet Russia, was willing to become a member of the League, and considered the foundations of peace would thereby he strengthened. It appealed to the British Government to extend an invitation of this kind to Russia. The resolution also urged the Government to make a supreme effort to bring the Disarmament Conference to a successful conclusion. In speeches supporting the resolution, members of the delegation said that they had no faith in a policy of defensive alliances. They regarded the League, imperfect as it might be, as the only practical instrument for maintaining peace and stability. Mr. MacDonald said that in the last two years, the British Government had used all its influence to obtain a disarmament convention. They even inserted actual figures and levels. Even after the despatch of a special mission to the capitals chiefly concerned, no agreement had yet been reached. Nothing could be done without agreement. The present position of the Disarmament Conference was a great disappointment to him. The British Government had taken a risk in setting an example in disarmament, which had unhappily not been followed and had held back programmes of expenditure in the hope of reaching an international convention. Meanwhile they would continue to use every effort in the cause of international peace. Sir J. Simon said he welcomed the putting forward of definite suggestions. Despite the difficulties involved, the Government took every opportunity of close contact and co-opera-

tion with the United States, but it must be borne in mind that the United States Government stood in a very special position, both politically and constitutionally. As regards Soviet Russia, it had been practice that Governments wishing to join League, should themselves make application. The Soviet Government had not so applied but it knew if it did so, it would be welcomed by the British Government.

TEST FOR THE LEAGUE. SIR J. SIMON’S STATEMENT. [BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS.] RUGBY, May 16. Sir J. Simon, addressing the Federation of Women’s Institutes, at London, described it as very distressing and serious that no internatonal agreement on disarmament was yet. reached'. He shared the keen disappointment so widely felt, but he did not share the view that because two years had passed without achieving an agreement, therefore the whole enterprise was hopeless and should be abandoned. Remarking that he hoped soon to attend the next meeting of the confer-

ence. Sir J. Simon stated: “Speaking on behalf of the British Government, I may say we shall do our very best that can be done to bring an agreement about. I shall go to Geneva full of confidence, because I am profoundly convinced the hearts and hopes of the British people are most deeply pledged' on this issue. There is no effort too great, or persuasion that could bo superfluous, for the purpose of bringing about an agreement. If an agreement is not reached, the League is going to suffer a severe blow. The British policy stands for the support and maintenance of the League. To substitute for this new world method of international cooperation, the old world methods of one country arming itself against another will not do. While he believed that valuable results would follow if the general level of armaments were reduced, the real difficulty which faced the conference was not the technical question as to how many arms of a particular kind a particular nation should have. Armaments were only an indication of the disease of fear, and unless something could be done to strike at the roots of this terrible disease, the best technical experts in the world would not be able to produce an agreement for international disarmament.

BRITAIN’S DELEGATE. RUGBY, May 15. Mr Eden will be the chief representative of the British Government throughout the present meeting of the Council of the League of Nations at Geneva. Sir J. Simon had planned to fly to Geneva after to-morrow’s Cabinet meeting, but in view of Friday’s debate in the commons on foreign affairs, he is obliged to alter his arrangements. MR HENDERSON’S DENIAL. RUGBY, May 16. Dlr A. Henderson, to-day. denied the report that he had resigned the Presidency of the Disarmament Conference. Tie said he was making the necessary arrangements lor work io bo resumed on May 29, ami was determined to (io everything in his power to influence the Conference to carry through the original task, ARCHBISHOP’S APPEAL LONDON, May 16. The Archbishop of Canterbury, impressed with the gravity of the international situation, has issued a manifesto, emphasising the worldwide longing for peace, and pointing out that this is frustrated by national fear and suspicion. The world needed a sense of security with which the present scale of armaments was incompatible. The failure of the Disarmament Conference would inexcusably betray the hopes of multitudes. The price of security was willingness to accept collective action of nations.

as members of one Commonwealth, failing which civilisation was imperilled. FRENCH HOPE. (Recd. May 17, 2 p.m.) GENEVA, May 16. M. Barthoq (French Foreign Secretary) and other leaders emphatically denied the rumour that the Disarmament Conference had beep adjourned sine die. No decision regarding its late can be taken before the Bureau meets. Al. Barthou told the journalists that he wanted the Convention, and still hoped something could be done.

ARMS EMBARGO U.S.A. BLOCKS CO-OPERATION RUGBY, May 16. Mr Baldwin, on behalf of the Foreign Secretary, replied to a Parliamentary question calling attention to the statement, that arms were imported to Bolivia and Paraguay from America and Europe. With regard to the suggestion that irrespective of the action of foreign armament factories, licenses should be withheld for such exports from Britain, Mr Baldwin said that he feared no useful purpose would be served by such a course, since the embargo to be effective, must be enforced at least by the principal arms manufacturing countries, several of which "had not yet expressed a readiness to co-op-' erate.

’ Recapituating the history of the pro- ’ posal for an arms embargo, Mr Baldwin said it was on the initiative of the ’ British Government that the exchange , of views originally took place more ■ than a year ago between the Govern- ' ments of the United Kingdom, United ’ States, France and Italy, with a view to an agreement between them to prohibit the export of arms to Bolivia and Paraguay. Subsequently the British Government with the co-operation of the French Government, submitted a memorandum to the League Council in February, 1933, suggesting the steps to be taken under the covenant to recommend governments to impose this embargo. The draft declaration to be signed by the governments in favour of this step was considered by the Council, and accepted by all the States, members of the council, including the United Kingdom. A number of States made acceptance subject to the acceptance of the declaration by a specified number of other States including the United States. The Government of the United States, however, stated it was unable to impose an embargo until the necessary legislation was imposed by Congress, and no such legislation had been passed. CLERGY AND ARMAMENTS. LONDON, May 16. The “News Chronicle” says: “Following upon protests from clergymen throughout the country against any Christian organisation deriving revenue from armament shares, the Clergy Pensions Institutions’ Board have decided to dispose of the Board’s £lO,OOO holding in the firm.of Vickers, Ltd., and re-invest the capital proceeds in trustee stock. The Board’s holding in the Vickers Coy. was acquired in 1894, when its institutions were conducted more on the lines of an ordinary commercial insurance company.