FRANCE SUSPECTS BRITAIN.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XLIV, Issue 14703, 2 June 1920, Page 6

FRANCE SUSPECTS BRITAIN.

CLAIMS ON THE INDEMNITY. [By Electric) telegraph—CorYhicnT.] (Per Press Association.) "(Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.) Received' June 1, at 8.30 p.m. PARIS, June 1. Commenting on the growing French mistrust of England over the. Peace settlement, a Paris paper says that Mr Lloyd George dwelt eloquently upon Australia's losses in "human capital" as a reason for the non-acceptance of the French claims for reparation. French opinion considers its own losses more serious than Australia's or those of any British Dominion. I EDITORIAL NOTE, j. It is an impossibility to accept implicitly the statement that "Mr Lloyd George dwelt eloquently upon Australia's losses in 'human capital' as a reivson for the non-acceptance of the French claims for reparation. The Treaty of Peace with Germany, so far as we can discover, does not make provision for reparation for loss of "human capiV I>J1 >J in the ordinary conception of the term, and Australia has certainly no special claim for consideration in that respect. The part of the Treaty dealing with this branch of the subject provides that compensation may be claimed from Germany for "damage to injured persons and to surviving dependents by personal injury to or death of civilians caused by acts of war, including bombardments or other attacks on land, on sea, or from the air, and all the direct consequences thereof, and of all operations of war by the two groups of belligerents wherever arising." There is no reference hero to loss of "human capital," and the compensation to be made by Germany in respect to personal loss is limited to civilians. It is provided, however, that Germany shall compensate the Allied and Associate Powers in respect to all pensions becoming payable as a result, of the war, and it is probably in that direstion that Australia has been pushing her claim. What France hns urged is that she sliqgjld receive priority in respect to territorial damage caused by the Germans. But, while special provision appears to be made for giving priority to Belgium in payment for reparation, thee is nothing anything of tiltkind to France, who is put upon a. footing of equality with all other countries —to wit with Britain in regard to reparation for damage done by aerial bombardments, sinking of ships, etc. France has been largely counting upon the receipt of reparation payments for carrying on the work of reconstruction, and "on the surface it would appear that she is entitled to receive special consideration. The main reason, according to an acceptable authority, why Britain is not prepared to acknowledge that claim is that, wln'lo other countries have taxed their peoples heavily to improve their financial positions, France has done practically nothing in that direcelsewhere, great fortunes have been made out. of the war, and that in France these have been "untaxed or taxed merely on a ore-war basis." Our authority adds: "Even the very mild income tax is not always collected, and the French Government has iust announced through M. Marsal. Finance Minister, that it does not propose imposing any war profits tax or jn anv way seeking to tap the great wealth created in a privileged class by a war which has impoverished so many. French finance is" closely studied in London. and appeals that France has borne the brunt of the fighting and seen onesixth of her territory devastated do not meet with the sympathy they once did from men who have been *n Paris recently and seen unprecedented luxury and <lisplav."