SOVIET RESENTFUL OF POWERS’ INTERVENTION

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 7084, 5 December 1929, Page 6

SOVIET RESENTFUL OF POWERS’ INTERVENTION

Keeps Own Conscience

ONLY TWO PARTIES ARE CONCERNED IN QUARREL

COUNSEL REJECTED. United Press Association.— By Electri® Telegraph—Copyright. Received Wednesday, 7.45 p.m. MOSCOW, Dec. 4. The Soviet reply to the United States’ Note has been handed to M. Herbetts, French Ambassador, by M. Litvinov. " . It points out that the United States applied to the Soviet when the latter was directly negotiating with Mukden. Such action was unjustifiable pressure on these negotiations, hence it could not be rogarded as a friendly act, The Russo-Chinese dispute must be settled by direct negotiations, with which interference was not permissible. The Soviet expressed amazement that the United States, which by its own desire had no official relations with Russia, should offer it advice and counsel.

Provocation Alleged on Part of

Nanking

“POLICY OF PEACE.”

Received Wednesday, 7.45 p.m. LONDON, Dec. 4.

The reply of the Soviet claims it has never resorted to military action for defenco and has pursued a policy of peace from the first day of its existence. It intended to continue independently of the Paris Act. The Nanking Government, during recent years, had crirried on a provocative policy, culminating in the seizure of the Eastern railway. The Soviet said it believed similar action towards tho United States, Britain, or France would be considered sufficient cause for their operating under the reservations made when signing the pact renouncing war. The Soviet then declared it did not recognise these reservations and did not intend to use them.