FAILURE AT GENEVA

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 19 March 1926, Page 5

FAILURE AT GENEVA

FIXING RESPONSIBILITY. GERMANY WILL COME AGAIN. APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION. BY CABLE—PBES3 ASSOCIATION—COPYRIGHT. LONDON, March 18. Before the German delegation left for home, the official spokesman announced that Germany clid not intend withdrawing her application for membership of the League. The extent of the setback at Geneva to European settlement is already shown by the crop of new issues being raised in all quarters. The most important concerns the fate of the Locarno Treaty itself, it is pointed out by responsible papers, such as the Daily Telegraph, which say the treaty lacks legal force so long as Germany is outside the League of Nations. This France appears to have overlooked in her eagerness to reconstitute the League Council. Other quarters suggest that, the Locarno spirit having waned, it may he advisable to re-examine the guarantees offered to Far nee and Germany by Bijfekiin, which were not approved uijbfiltmously, but were accepted hitherto because, it was argued, possible dangers had been rendered innocuous by the spirit of tiie treaty, if not by the text. It is indicated, also, that the pressure of the claimants will not cease with the postponement, but is more likely to increase. Certainly attention will probably be given to the question of a seat for the Dominions. Finally, there is the unsolved mystery of the obduracy of Brazil, whose own chances of re-election are considered most remote. PRESS COMMENT. The Daily Telegraph’s diplomatic correspondent confirms that Italy is openly- accused of having encouraged Brazil, while the Berlin Nationalist newspapers, without qualification, similarly indict Signor Mussolini. The Daily Herald’s Geneva correspondent says that Signor Grandi, Signor Mussolini’s IJnder-Secretary of Foreign Affairs, told Italian pressmen that anything of an anti-Brazilian nature sent to Italy would be censored. “Suspicious Italy,” so a Brazilian delegate dubbed it. The Paris press refuses to accept Sir Austen Chamberlain’s description of the tragedy. Indeed, the more reactionary are inclined to be jubilant at Germany’s rebuff. The Journal des Debats says: “Germany, if admitted, would have intrigued against the Little Entente, so it is not for us to reproach Brazil.” The London press generally reaffirms faith in the future of the League, while strongly criticising the recent \vr anglings. The Daily Telegraph asks where will the authors of the Locarno settlement be half a year hence. Neither M. Br.iand’s nor Dr. Luther’s Government can he confident of surviving so long. The Morning Post considers it is now made clear that the power of indi vidual members of the council to veto any proposal may be used to dangerous effect. The Daily Chronicle and Daily News blame M. Briand and Sir Austen Chamberlain. The Times, declaring that the League knows now the restricted nature of its own powers, asks has any interested party been supporting Brazil, and does this' strange obduracy imply some obscure movement of American protest against the attempts to subordinate the League to the immediate purposes of Europe. The Daily Herald, while affirming that Signor Mussolini hates the League, says he saw the chance and took it The paper blames Sir Austen Chamberlain for encouraging the intriguers prior to the Assembly. The paper adds that if he has not the decency to Tesign he ought to be dismissed _ The Financial Times says the disappointment at the breakdown is reflected on the Stock Exchange. Brazilian stocks are displaying considerable -weakness. The Financial News remarks that there is nothing for financiers to do until better counsels prevail than to walk warily and hold tighter the reins of credit.