EMPTY POLEMICS.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 2122, 13 May 1922, Page 5

EMPTY POLEMICS.

GIST OF RUSSIAN REPLY. BETRAYS EARNEST DESIRE FOR PEACE. MORE FRENCH RESISTANCE. [By Electric Cable —Copyright.] [Aust. and N.Z. Cable Association.] (Received Friday, 9.0 p.m.) LONDON, May 11. The Australian Press correspondent at Genoa states that the Empire delegation has been summoned to analyse the Russian reply, which consists of about 8000 words. The major portion is taken up with empty polemics, which maKe negotiations almost impossible. Most of the pages are, about as valuable as paper roubles. Towards the end, the Russians get to business, and, with some claim to reason, declare the Allies memorandum asks Russia to take up serious obligations without receiving any return except vague promises. What.the Russians want to know is, just what these credits actually amount to and how they will rehabilitate Russian industrial life. The most satisfactory feature of the reply is the earnest desire to enter into a peace pact, and even if the document is not sound as a basis of negotiation, it is one whicii demands a reply. A peace pact will ■undoubtedly produce a real struggle, because the reply refers to the position of France during the Revolution and the confiscation of property on that occasion. The Russians draw an analogy between their revolution and the struggle, in France. It is stated (but the statement must be accepted with some reserve) that France will refuse to accept the reply in any circumstances, and that she ■does not wish to see her present prominent position in Europe fritteied away by a peace pact. The statement also suggests her siding with Belgium over the private property question was merely as a pretext on which she might maintain her resistance to the pact of non-aggression. The correspondent learns that the Italian view entirely coincides with that held by the British. Both nations arc firmly determined to pursue the Conference to a successful conclusion. It will take a day or two for the various delegations to assimilate the document, which will probably; not come before the Sub-Commission before Saturday or early next week. PROHIBITION OF PROPAGANDA. (Received Friday, 9.0 p.m.) LONDON. Alay 12. A summary of the Russian reply confirms the preamble already cabled. It adds that the delegation cannot accept the prohibition regarding propaganda, unless it is forbidden by the lav; of the land. Russia will discuss with the Powers interested the request to refrain from disturbing' the territorial or political status quo. Russia cannot be compelled to assume responsibilities to the nationals of foreign Powers for the annulment of her public debts and the nationalisation of her private property. A revolution is force majeure, and there is no obligation to compensate, but in the spirit of conciliation the principle of the Cannes resolution is accepted and Russia accepts liability for her public, but not for her war debt, on condition that losses caused by foreign wars and blockades are recognised. “NOT NEGOTTABLE.” (Received Friday, 9.30 p.m.) GENOA, Alay 12. While it is generally believed that the Conference will nominate an expert committee, as suggested in the Russian reply, delegates are almost unanimous in regarding the document as unnegotiable, the French freely describing - it as impudent. If an expert committee is formed it is believed it wifi be instructed to negotiate further with Russia on the basis of the Can- I nes resolutions and the convening j Powers’ memorandum. When the j committee’s work is completed, the Powers will possibly convene a new I conference. AI. Barthou and Air Lloyd George had a lengthy conference, and discussed the reply. The latter is reported to have admitted it was useless to continue to negotiate with the; Russians on the lines of their reply. Neutrals more or less agree with Air Lloyd George. SOVEREIGNTY OF SOVIET. (Received Friday. 11 p.m.) GENOA, Alay 12. The Russian reply considers reference to an arbitral tribunal on the questions of a war debts moratorium and pre-war debts, makes the sovereignty of the Soviet the sport of fortune. It agrees that former owners of property should enjoy preferential rights. Russia’s claims and counterclaims, past and present, should he entrusted to a mixed committee of experts nominated by the Conference.

tracted with defendants to supply them with the necessary sawmilling plant with the exception of an engine, the defendants on October 20 accepted the deposit on account of the plant, stating that machinery would be at Tc Kawa railway station. Part of the plant came to hand and plaintiffs proceeded with the erection of their mill, daily expecting the balance of the machinery to arrive as agreed upon. Subsequently a further portion came to hand on the 29th November, 1921, and plaintiffs commenced cutting in December, having to employ bullock teams to haul the timber out of the bush, as the hauler purchased had not come to hand. The using of bullocks restricted the output of their mill by about two-thirds. Further the break bench supplied was not the one plaintiffs agreed to purchase, being too light and the sa?> occasioned by bulk timber lessened the amount cut per day, besides a.t times turning out very indifferent work, this causing the plaintiffs to have timber on their hands, which they were unable to dispose of. Both witnesses were cross-examined at length by Mr. Cooper, and their evidence was still being taken when the Court adjourned until 10 o’clock this morning.