WAR DEBT DISCUSSION

Hawera Star, Volume LII, 28 January 1933, Page 5

WAR DEBT DISCUSSION

POSSIBILITY OF DEADLOCK OPINIONS IN AMERICA f VIEWS ON BRITISH REPLY. ; CHECK IN ROOSEVELT PLAN, j j '.tmiWNl —Tlv BUjtM? Teinfrapß ! •v.pvrurbt.) NEW YORK, Jan. 26. j Ail intensive study of the British j Note in official circles to-dav, says the “New York Times” Washington j correspondent, resulted in the general; opinion that the British in effect have rejected the Roosevelt-Hcover Jpilr.v posals for a war debt conference and that “the score is again zero,” i Observers cited the fact that the in- j vitation was simultaneous with the j study of economic problems. In. view j of this some observers' believe that j Britain’s willingness at present only to ! discuss debt has served to disrupt Mr F. D. Roosevelt’s programme. The best informed members of Congress believe that unless Mr. Roosevelt formulates a new thesis or extends the moratorium there will be a series of defaults on June 15, when the next payment is due. It is held to be certain that Mr. Roosevelt, even if he wishes, cannot induce the next Congress to remit any part of the British debt unless the reduction is accompanied by substantial concessions. The State Department contends the British memorandum is a step in “the; game” which is not necessarily final. They think the British are merely seeking to reassure the French that | Britain would not he a party to the j setting up of an Anglo-American j economic bloc against the world. ; Persons who had so interpreted the. British Note read with pleasure a dis- f patch from Warm Springs which represented Mr. Roosevelt as considering that the British Note was a strategic one and therefore determined to maintain a “poker face.” Professor Moiey, who came direct Tom Warm Springs, conferred with Mr H. L. Stimson, Secretary of State, concerning debts. Neither would reveal whether a. new Note to Britain was imminent or contemplated. A message from Warm Springs, Georgia, said a new game in international relations will be played by Mr, Roosevelt in taking np individually and separately with the European heads the war debt question in March and abandoning the commission idea, r He is determined to take full and lone | responsibility tor the outcome. Mr Roosevelt has clamped down the j hcl on any discussion and no one knows j what he has m mind. Silence greeted the announcement ,y Britain acepting his counter bid for j i discussion on world economics, m j connection with war debts, though j there was gratification at the response, j L'he same secrecy is covering war j debts plans as applied to the economic I conference, and silence met the dcclar. j ation bv Mr. Henry Rainey in the Sen- j ate against a revision or reduction, of . lebt payments.

CAPITAL PAYMENT SUGGESTION FOR SETTLEMENT. LOAN FROM. AMERICA. LONDON, Jan. 26. The “Daily Herald’s” city editor savs it is pretty certain that the settlement with the United States' must be in tlie form of <Mipital payment. It: is clear that all future payments tc the war debt account on the basis; of the Lausanne settlement of the British debt to' the United States would be funded at about £60,000.000 in gold. But- such a sum was obviously too low to be acceptable. On the contrary, it could be argued That a capital sum equalling ten years’- purchase of loan instalment might be 'reasonable. , '! This would mean a capital payment of £360,000,000 in gold or £470,003,01L sterling, but it was essential that it oe raised in the form of a loan in the United States, otherwise it would be impossible to transfer the money. It .vas unlikely that such a loan could be successfully issued in New York. A more reasonable figure would bt i 325,000,000, which might be raised in New York at 4 per cent., and which would mean the payment of £13,000,300 in interest annually.