INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20819, 11 March 1931, Page 11

INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES

PACIFIC SETTLEMENT.

AIM OF GENERAL ACT.

DEBATE IN THE COMMONS. CONSERVATIVE OPPOSITION. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright. (Received Marc'i 30. 5.5 p.m.) British Wireless. RUCrBY. March 9. The Foreign Secretary, Mr. Arthur Henderson, asked the House of Commons to-day for its approval for ratification by the British Government—subject to four conditions enunciated in a recent. White Paper —of the General Act for the pacific settlement of international disputes. The Minister said this would complete Britain's acceptance of arbitration for all classes of international disputes, subject to certain reservations. 'J he Government regarded the ratification of the General Act as an important part of the preparation for the success of the Disarmament Conference of 1932, which it believed by its results would determine the future course of events in Europe and the world.

An amendment was moved by Sir Austen Chamberlain, formerly Foreign Secretary. He stated that the United States, author of the Pact of Paris, did not share the view that it needed other measures to give it force. He maintained that the effect of the General Act would be to withdraw from the League Council questions with which it was especially competent to deal, and to encourage frivolous claims and create trouble.

Covenant of the League, Gould territorial questions, or Britain's position in Egypt, or some other Power's desire to take over Britain's Palestine mandate, be referred to arbitrators ? asked Sir Austen. The most difficult and dangerous international disputes were not legal questions. Why did the League Council and the covenant exist if not to deal with those questions? If these were taken away tlicy might as well tear the covenant to pieces.

The Government was asking the nation to take risks over its most vital interests which it would not take over its own party affairs. It was ignoring the limitations practical experience had placed on the utility of compulsory arbitration. Mr. Henderson said he could not agree that the acceptance of the General Act would diminish the authority of the League Council. Majority Against Amendment.

Sir Herbert Samuel, Liberal member for Darwen, Lancashire, opposed the amendment. He claimed that the acceptance of the General Act would enable the world to face its problems with new hope. Instead of superseding the functions either of the covenant or the League Council, it was the League's own proposal to the world for settling disputes.

The Government had properly reserved the right in certain cases to invoke the conciliation of the Council instead of arbitration. The acceptance of Sir Austen's amendment would leave international machinery patently incomplete. It would amaze the peace-loving Dominions and create the impression of a sinister purpose. It would strengthen the reactionary and militarist elements throughout the world and prejudice the Disarmament Conference.

Sir Herbert admitted that there were some risks in arbitration, but if they refused them they would be accepting the risks of war. The amendment was lost by 231 votes to 139.