SECURITY QUESTION

Grey River Argus, 16 June 1925, Page 5

SECURITY QUESTION

FRANCE’S PROPOSAL FOR ARBITRATION. LODDOX, June 13. The “Sunday Times” correspondent nt laris says: France’s proposal is to guarantee peace, both eastward and westward. by arbitration treaties, that in the contingency of a German violation, not France only, hut tho League of Nations would also take action against the assailant. Britain’s liability would be limited to the obligations already undertaken under the con venant of the League of Nations. GERMAN ACCEPTABLE TO FRANCE. LONDON, June 14. Tho present week promises fn 1 momentous one in the affairs of Eu_ The French reply this week will be despatched to Berlin, after which it will be published in all parts’ of tho world, thereupon wo may expect a flood of new' comment to be released in. eluding the German opinion, which has been strangely silent, except for the first outburst based upon the inaccurate forecast. The most reliable information is that the French reply will he suave in tone, and will deal mainly in generalities. 'I h“ chief ' ' will bp the acceptance of the German proposition bv France. CONFERENCE LIKELY. The next step will be the German Government’s reaffirmation of the do.sire to negotiate a pact, followed by a conference to arrange the details, and draw up terms of the pact. It is ex-, jiected that Mr Chamberlain will return from Switzerland where ho is holidaying. on Wednesday, and the Commons will debate the reply on Thursday. or at any rate, as soon as possible after the note is published.

ADVERSE BRITISH CRITICISM OF PACT PRINCIPLE. LONDON, June 14. Mr Garvin, in a lengthy article in the “Observer” on the proposed pact, says: “Nothing on earth would in. d"» ( . the British democracy to mobilise, unless the previous consultation had been inadequate, and the action of •'nee understood and approved by the decision aud weight of British public opinion. We hope our friends across the Channel will never forget this condition.” Sir lan Hamilton, speaking at South Norwood, said: “We realise the camouflage of words like “pact.” “protocol,” “defence” and “security.” If you boil them down, you will find at the bottom of the saucepan, an obligation to tight, which will be hung round the necks of our youngsters. Don’t let us fight in another man’s quarrel. If we fight, kt is be our own war, agreed to by those about to die. The “Sunday Express” says: The astounding feature about the proposed pact is that it would pledge our blood and treasure to French policy without a settlement of French debt. Mr Lloyd George, addressing a Methodist gathering at Scnrboroun-h said: The British Empire must not march through the ages bearing the brand of Cain. It was odd that he.had begun to plead for Germany, but was pleading for justice and fairness, which was the British way. The continual occupation of Cologne was a danger to peace. Breaches of disarmament which France had discovered were insufficient cause for non.evacuation. Tho present pedantic, illiberal, inequitable, oppressive application of the Treaty of Versailles was another peril. There were a dozen other European disputes which might lead to war, unless tho League of Nations was strengthened. The League must dominate any Anglo-French pact.