GERMAN ARMS DEMAND

Grey River Argus, 22 September 1932, Page 5

GERMAN ARMS DEMAND

BRITISH REPLY Not Relished (Aus. & N.Z. Cable Assn). LONDON, September 20. ‘‘The Times’s” B-rl’n correspondent says: The British statement on the Germa n demand for armaments equality was received with surprise and resentme.nt, because such a sharp criticism, concerning the unw’sdom of the German efforts and such uncompromising refutation of the Ger man legal arguments, were nowhere expected. Resentment arises because of the suggestion that Ge.man action might hinder “the smooth, harmonious work of the Disarmament Conference.’’ This, it is claimed, is English hypocrisy at its worst, but the masterly drafting of th e British statement is ruefully realised by official Germany. The- disillusionment and disappoint meat among a large body of German opinion over the British attitude is comparable only with the astonishment over th e British declaration of war in 1914.” So moderate a journal as ‘‘Deutsche All'-gemeine Zeitung” declares that the British Note -was framed in a schoolmasterly ironic tone, which is quite intolerable, adding: It will completely destroy Germany’s last belief in British goodwill. MR HOOVER ON THE RAIL. WASHINGTON. September 20. Mr Hoover issued a statement saying the United States was divorced from what he termed the German arms question, but he sa *d the United States was anxious that Germany should continue to participate i n the Arms Conference. Hoover’s Appeal FOB GERMAN AID IN disarmament. WASHINGTON, September 20. In what is considered a clarification of press reports from Paris that Ambassadors Edge and Senator Reed had advised the French officials that America would support Britain and France in the German arms controversy, President Hoover issued a statement to-day in which he says: ‘‘With reference to the press despatches from Paris on the German arms question, the position of this Government is clear. The sole question in which this country is interested is the reducing of the arms of the whole world step b” step. We are not a party to the Versailles Treaty and its limitation of German arms. That is solely a European question. The United States had already declared it will take no part in that discussion. We are anxious that Germany shall continue to participate in the Arms Conference, which now has such promise of progress for the entire world, and that she shall lend her aid to this great purpose.” Diplomatic circles have interpreted this as being what amounts to a personal effort on the part of the President to prevent the breaking of the disarmament conference, and as a virtual appeal to Germany not to withdraw from negotiations. The unofficial opinion expressed in Government circles is that the Government considers Germany’s demand to be totally inconsistent with President Hoover’s one-third armament reduction proposal. It. is further feared that Germany’s position may possibly jeopardise the tentative agreements already reached at Geneva.

BILLY HUGHES. CONDEMNS GERMANY’S DEMANDS. LONDON, September 21. Mr W. M. of Australia, commenting on Germany’s armaments demand, said that it should not be taken too seriously. Probably it was a political gesture, for home consumption. At th e same time he approved of the British Reply. This demana for an equality in armed forces placed the League of Nations in an impossible position. i If Germany’s demand were conceded h P said, it would destroy the foundation of the Versailles Treaty, bringing the League itself down, and rendering all of its provisions mere scraps of pa; er, including thos PI relating to the New Guinea Mandates which would be fatal to Australia. Germany’s suggestion was that all nations should reduce their armaments to the present German level. As Germany was well aware, this would not be entertained bv France.