BOUND TO FRANCE

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 2713, 22 June 1925, Page 7

BOUND TO FRANCE

STRONG BRITISH CRITICISM OF PACT Many Leaders See Danger* Ahead i ~ ONE-SIDED PROVISIONS. 1 IBy Electric Cable—Copyright-1 ! [Aust. and N.Z. Cable Association." (Received Sunday ,11.5 p.m LONDON June 21. 7 Mr Gavin writing to the “Observer" and commenting on the proposed Pad " says: “Germany apparently recognise? : the permanent cession of Alsace- ‘ Lorraine to France. This ought tc ' mean the end of the thousand years ' feud. So far, nothing could be mors ‘ satisfactory, buit in some uncertalr words France seems to reserve th( 3 right to attack Germany in Polish in- ' terests, without consulting Britain oi 3 the League upon this point. Searching 1 criticism will fasten on this, and the 3 possibilities of an arbitrary attack will have to be eliminated before any final Pact can be signed. Neither by Pact nor protocol will Britain run : any risk of being involved in war against her own will and judgment.” PROTESTS FROM ALL DOMINIONS ' IMPOSSIBLE TO LIMIT WAR ZONE (Received Sunday 7 p.m) LONDON, June 20. The proposed security Pact continues to evoke the strongest criticism. Ill" !“$ The '“Daily Express” prints special cables from Melbourne, Christchurch, Ottawa, and Capt Town, generally opposing the commitment. The “Express,” editorially argues the Pact is really unilateral, because it compels Britain to fight on the side of Prance, whatever the justice, or the occasion, of the conflict. If Germany invades the demilitarised zone, Britain. ipso facto ,is at war with Germany, but it does not follow that Britain is at war with France if she crosses the zone in an assault on Germany. The “Dally Telegraph’s” diplomatic correspondent says there is talk of appointing a committee of jurists for the purpose of defining what constitutes the aggressor, or aggression. The “Daily Chronicle,” in discussing proposed arbitration treaties by Germany with Franco and Belguim, quotes a section of the French Note dealing therewith: Both treaties are to apply to all disputes and if one of the parties, refusing to submit the dispute to Arbitration, or to carry out out an Arbitral award, resorts to hostile measures the guarantee, under which Britain is bound to act, would come into immediate operation. The “Chronicle” comments: “It appears from Mr Chamberlain's dispatch of May 28, that the British Government does not conceive the guarantee as obliging Britain to resort to force anywhere, except in the guaranteed Rhineland area, but in practice, if we had to take action, it would be almost impossible to thus limit the sphere.” The “Chronicle” concludes by viewing the scheme, as a whole, with profound scepticism. SIGNIFICANT DECLARATION. SOUTH AFRICAN UNION OR PROTOCOL? (Received Sunday, 7 p.m.) CAPETOWN, June 20. A Parliamentary paper containing a communication between the Premier and flie Governor-General on the Geneva protocol has been issued. The Ministers regret that they are unable to recommend the acceptance of the protocol to Parliament. The protocol would only make it more difficult for nations outside the League to join and it was impossible to calculate the obligations accruing therefrom. Further, the interests of South Africa demand that no international obligations hould be entered into entailing participation or Interference by the Union in matters not, or only remotely concerning her, whereby her real and proper interests may eventually be jeopardised. The publication of the document now is regarded as significant, in view of the decisions on the new security pact and as an Indication of the Government’s attitude thereon.