NO MORE WAR.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 10563, 17 April 1928, Page 5

NO MORE WAR.

, ; PROPOSED RENUNCIATION TREATY AMERICA’S NOTE TO POWERS PROPOSAL WELL RECEIVED BY * U.S. PRESS ‘British Oilloial Wireless 1 RUGBY, April 15. . The newspapers publish to-day the text of the identical Note communicated ,to the Governments of the Great Powers by the United States on the question of a possible international renunciation of war. The Note is accompanied by a preliminary draft treaty representing in it general way .the form of multilateral treaty. the United States Government is prepared to sign. The Note refers to correspondence on the proposals with France, whoso Government pointed out certain considerations which in a multilateral treaty must be . borne in mind bv Powers which are members of the Leaguo of Nations, parties to the treaties of Locarno and to other treaties guaranteeing neutrality. The United States’ proposal has been well received by the press, and it is recognised, that it warrant* immediate careful and sympathetic examination. HOW FAR, IS WAR, RENUNCIATION COVERED? POSITION OF OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE MEASURES LONDON’ TIMES WANTS MORE INFORMATION (British Official Wireless.! RUGBY, April lb. The Times commenting on the American war renunciation note, says:— “Mr Kellogg's proposal as now addressed to the five Powers has Liken a much more precise and definite form than had seemed possible at the stages reached in the _ discussion with France alone. It is indeed a very remarkable fact that the United" States, after long abstention from any general commitments in world politics, now submits lor acceptance to the other five Powers a treaty which' would bind them to absolute renunciation of war as an .-instrument of policy -in their mutual dealings. If these bis Powers alone found it possible to bind themselves solemnly in such an engagement after the fullest consideration of all that it would imply in the possible vicissitudes or the coming years, it would, of coursq, mean a tremendous step forward in the pacification of the world. “The United States has generously assumed great responsibility in making an offer the scope of which is so far-reaching that the responsibility is shared now by those to whom the offer is formally made. The Powers, upon whom much depends, are invited to commit themselves to a continuous policy of peace, and to definitely put- war out of consideration in their mutual intercourse. An assumption v upon which tlie United States Government lays great stress is that most of the leading nations should be eager to follow so notable an example. Since the question is so clearly put the response of the Powers must he equal to the occasion. For the British Government the task presents little difficulty. Peace and the prevention oi war is for the whole of the British Empire the dominant issue. The chief commitments assumed by the British Government since the war have been assumed with the object of ensuring peace, and of building up alternatives to war as an instrument of policy?’ . ... . „ Referring to M. Briaud.s reference to the bearing of the League of Nations and the Locarno Pact on the proposed pact, the Times says ( “It "cannot he forgotten that both the League of Nations and the Locarno Pact admit the possibility of war in the last resort as a means of maintaining peace. In no sense can these commitments he regarded as implying that states undertaking them regard war as a means of furthering their national aims. If that is admitted, they are not incompatible with, acceptance of the American proposal. always provided that acceptance. while apparently enlarging the scope, does not actually weaken the effect of such serious commitments as these.” " The Times concludes by' welcoming the urospect of a great Power like the United States being brought into service in such a cause, hut it adds: “Britain’s conception of her solemn engagements permits of no looking hack, as we must know exactly to what we ar© committed. If, therefore, we ask whether renunciation of war covers purely, defensive or policy measures, whether it includes or -excludes League sanctions and whether the readiness of the United States Government to sign such a treaty commits the American people in the same 'degree as the Powers would be committed, it is because we are sincerely anxious that the enterprise should succeed” DOMINIONS MUST 'NFLUENOK • BRITAIN’S- DECISION UNFETTERED MULTI-LATERAL PACT PROBABLY FAVORED United Press Assn, by £l. Tel. Copyright, lAuatialiun Press Association.* (Received April 16, 8.15 p.m.) LONDON, April 16. The Daily Telegraph’s diplomatic correspondent says British official circles express the opinion that the British decision regarding Mr Kellogg’s plan for the abolition of war will bo determined, not on technicalities, but on fclio broad appraisement of the political and moral values involved after the fullest , onsnltation between the Home and the Dominion Governments. The latter are hound to carry the greatest weight. It is a safe assumption that as most of the Dominions were unwilling 'jto jsign even the Rhineland pact, Dominion opinion will bo found in close agree merit with Washington’s plea that the conclusion of a multi-lateral pact should not he. obstructed or frustrated by claims of military alliances The opinion is universal in British circles that renewed collaboration between America and Europe is worth generous concessions.,