NAVAL PACT.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVIII, Issue 10726, 25 October 1928, Page 5

NAVAL PACT.

ANGLO..FK.ENCH EFFORTS

AMERICA HOPES FOR A COMPROMISE.

Onited Preas Assn, by El. Tel. Copyright (Australian Press Aaan.)

WASHINGTON, Oct. 23. It is stated at White House that President Coolidge Joels that tho chances of holding another naval armaments conference before 1931 have been made very remote by the failure of the Anglo-French attempt to reach a naval . agreement. On the other hand, however, he is gratified by the' changed attitude shown by both countries in the correspondence relating to the proposed agreement, for whereas France rejected President Coolidge’s invitation to a conference she has now slicj&B) her willingness to approach, the naval problem. President Coolidge also feels that Britain’s position revealed a willingness to adjust her naval policy to the realities of the problem. Ilis view therefore is that Britain might be willing to make further adjust ments to meet the American posi lion.

BRITAIN’S EXCLUSION OF RESERVISTS FROM ESTIMATES: PRESENT GOVERNMENT CONSIDERED BOUND. United Press Assn, by El. Tel. Copyright (Australian ' Press Assn.> (Received Oct. 24, 7.5 p.m.) LONDON, Oct. 24. The Morning Post’s diplomatic correspondent understands that the British Government considers itself bound by & promise to France to acquiesce in the the exclusion of trained reservists from the estimates of lighting forces. He adds: “This does not impose an obligation on any future Government.” ITALY ALWAYS SUSPICIOUS. DID NOT KNOW TRUE POSITION TILL SEPTEMBER. Unlvod Press Assn, by El. Tel. Copyripht (Australian Preso Association.’ (Received Oct. 24, 7.5 pan.) ROME, Oct. 24. While critics in London are attacking the British Government’s lack of frankness respecting reserves, the Giornale d’ltalia, similarly attacking France, says: “Italy divined that the Anglo-French agreement included a military agreement. The Under-Secretary, Signor Grandi ,on August 3, asked M. 13csumarchais point blank, but the latter averted a direct answer. It was not until September 27 that Italy learned the true position. The journal accuses France of trying to keep Italy in the dark, but criticism is directed at diplomatic methods rather than at the substance of the agreement, in which respect, Italy, with her trained reserves, sides with France

“AMAZING BLUNDER.” LS PRICE PAID IRREVOCABLE? LONDON, Oct. 22. Political correspondents indicate that, when the subject is debated in Parliament a fortnight lienee, the critics will ask why no hint was given on J illy 30 that the British attitude on reservists had changed and what the present position is thereon. A correspondent states the record of the Briand-Chamberlain conversation on March 9 mokes it clear that the British military concession was an integral part of “the bargain. This was further emphasised in the Note rfom Earl Crewe to M. Briand in June 2S and confirmed by the telegram from Sir A. Chamberlain to Sir H. Rum bold on August 5. The natural inference was that the military concession would stand or fall according to whether the naval agreement stood or fell. Yet a different note was sounded in Lord Cushendun’s telegram to the British Embassy at Washington on August 10 and" in a circular dispatch on September 9, in which it was hinted that the withdrawal of the British opposition to the French thesis regarding reserves should be regarded as final.

The Daily Chronicle says the Government's amazing I>l under was to select terms which it must have known were utterly repugnant to r.S.A. A skeleton of the terms, which are plainly anti-American, seems to have been originally suggested by a French naval officer. When it came to Sir A. Chamberlain's ears, he should have said it was futile to waste time discussing the proposal. since V ashington would, obviously never assent. Instead, Sir A. Chamberlain fell in love with the plan and even told France that, if she would agree to the British proposals, Britain would wave her objection to the unlimited conscription of reserves. The Daily Chronicle asks: “Is this price paid "France to be regarded as irrevocable ?”