RUSSIA’S REPLY

Hokitika Guardian, 5 December 1929, Page 5

RUSSIA’S REPLY

TO U.S.A. INTERVENTION. (United Press Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copyright). MOSCOW, December 4. The Sbviet’s reply to tlie United States note urging pacific means ior the settlement of the ltusso-C hinese Manchurian differences, has been handed to M„ Herbetto, the French Ambassador at Moscow, by M. Litvinoff (Soviet Foreign Minister). The reply points out that the United States had applied to the Soviet at the time when the Soviet has bt'en directly negotiating with the Mukden Government. Such an action by America was not a justifiable pressure to put on these negotiations. Hence the United States note could not be regarded as a friendly act. M. Litvinoff says that the RussoChinose dispute must be settled by direct negotiation, and with this interference would not be permissible. The Soviet was that the United States, which, by its own desire, has had no official relations with Russia, should offer Russia advice and counsel. SOVIET PROVOKED. BY CHINESE ACTION.

LONDON, December 4

The reply of the Soviet to the United States points out that the Soviet, unlike other Powers, claims never to have resorted to military action for its defence, but to have pursued a'policy of peace "rom Die first day of the ?'». viet’s existence, which policy it intends tb Continue independently of tli’e Paris (Kellogg) Pnc-t. : The reply states that the Nanking Government during recent years has carried on a provocative policy, culminating in the seizure of the Eastern Railway. ' The Soviet believes, that if similar neby the Nanking Government towards the United States, Britain or France were taken, it would be considered by them to be a sufficient cause for their bringing into operation the reservations * which s they made when they wrere .signing: the Pact renouncing war. • j

The Soviet then.declared that it did nptrecognise those reservations, and that it did-not: intend to use them.

u .MOSCOW’S REPLY.

•>i * { r • OTHER POWERS’ ATTITUDE. (United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright). (Received this rlav at 9.25 a.m.) WASHINGTON, Dec. 4. Considerable surprise is expressed by the t State Department at Moscow's r»ply to Mr Stimson’s note regarding Russian-Chinese relations. Answers from other Kellogg Pact signatories to Mr Stimson’s request that they co-operate have rather, complicated than clarified:, the. situation. A summary of-the latest response, is, 01S ‘fplkpVS : 1 Mexico agreed .to addre^svNankins and.. Moscow along'.lines similar to the American-; communication, 2 -v. Holland : <under,took-' tb communicate with.'China but.mt the Soviet, with which-sho bps. no diplomatic relations. Cuba promised to. co-operate. Jt'is.i.nQW considered that Air Stim--601,1. is.-, likely , to,.reply to. Moscow, later. i,r b:- i vi .. . !-f -'- "> 1- '.-! ' ' REPLY' TO RUSSIA. deceived tin's day at noon.) WASHINGTON, December 5. Taking notice of the Russian memorandum to the United States as reported in the press, Secretary Stimson said to-day that the message the American Government sent to China and Russia was “not from unfriendly motives, but Because this Governments regards the Pact of Paris as a covenant which lias profoundly .modified the attitude of the world,towards peace.”-