REPARATIONS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18754, 6 January 1923, Page 9

REPARATIONS

THE CONFERENCE FAILS. ENOS BN HOPELESS DISAGREEMENT. Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyrignt VANCOUVER, January 4. A United Press Association message states that the Prime Ministers’ conference in Paris ended in complete disagreement.—A. and N.Z. Cable. STILL FRIENDS. THOUGH AGREEING TO DIFFER. PARTS, January 4. When the Conference re-opened an official French Note was issued declaring that under a contract signed <at Calais on June 25, 1916, France received from Britain credits to the extent of £150,000,000, as security for which 1* ranee sent £50,000,000 worth of gold to London on the understanding that the gold would bo returned to Franco in three years after the conclusion of the war, upon French repayments. England in 1917, and again in 1919, sought release from her obligations to return the gold, hut France refused, consequently England is still under an obligation to return the gold.—A. and N.Z. Cable. After tile conference terminated, it was announced that the Anglo-French viewpoints were irreconcilable. Mr Bonar Law, on leaving the room, declared that Britain’s friendship for the French people remained unabated. M. Poincare reciprocated this sentiment. —A. and N.Z. Cable. THE BRITISH VIEW. FRANCE- HEADING FOR DISASTER. ' LONDON, January 4, The Daily Mail’s Paris correspondent says there is no illusion in the minds of British Ministers regarding the speedy breaking up of the conference. One of the British delegates stated: “The main object now must be to minimise as far as we can the breach in the Entente. Our friendship is no less sincere. Though we are convinced that the French plan is disastrous, no doubt remains that France will proceed with independent action. We must formally protest. as we are firmly convinced that destroying Germany’s credit will have very serious consequences.”—A. and N.Z. Cable. • A FORECAST. PARIS, January 4. A member of the British delegation expresses tho opinion that if France decides to take isolated action Britain is bound to make a formal protest, at the same time mailing it clear that she will not participate in any reparations France may secure by her action. The feeling in British circles is that the conference will break up to-night. ITALIAN PEACEMAKERS, EFFORT TO SAVE CONFERENCE FAILS. PARIS, January 4. The Italian delegation has assumed the role of conciliators. They have drafted a plan endeavouring to combine important points in the French and British schemes. When the conference resumed Signor Torreta submitted the compromise. It is believed that the French are unlikely to accept it. Diplomatic circles are of opinion that Britain will withdraw from tho Reparation* Commission, if a rupture of tho Entente results from the conference. A special courier left Paris by aeroplane at 2 o’clock hearing an important despatch from Mr Bonar Law to his Cabinet.—A. and N.Z. Cable. FRANCE’S ACTION. RUHR OCCUPATION EXPECTED. BRITAIN MAY WITHDRAW FROM COMMISSION. LONDON, January 5. (Received January u, at 7.20 p.m.) Mr Donoghue, writing in the Daily Chronicle, says: Now that France has recovered her liberty of action, a Note will be sent to Germany requesting her acceptance of the French plan. If Germany refuses, the sanctions will be immcdiatelv applied, including the occupation of Essen, Bochum, and the Ruhr, and the establishment- of a Customs barrier It is understood that Mr Bonar Law will cancel Britain’s participation in the Reparations Commission, giving a year’s notice to that effect. Meanwhile, the British delegates will abstain from attending its meetings.—A. and N.Z. Cable. EFFECT OF OCCUPATION. PROPOSED WITHDRAWAL OF , BRITISH TROOPS. LONDON, January 5. (Received January 5, at 7.20 p.m.) The Daily Express Paris correspondent says: Operations connected with the occupation of the Ruhr arc expected to be completed in' one day. / The farthest point of the section to bo occupied is only 10 miles distant from the present French occupied area. From 4000 to 5000 troops will be used to deal with the expected incidents. It is learned that Mr Bonar Law unofficially suggested to’M. Poincare the withdrawal of the British from the Rhine, as tho French .action would remove the possibility of German payments towards the cost of the Armies of Occupation A. and N.Z. Cable. FRENCH PRESS VIEWS. PARIS, January 4. The newspaper Eclair, in discussing reparations question, criticises -England’s narrow egotism, and adds: “There is a ditch between England and France. It is not France who will cross it.” Le Matin says: “Mr Bonar Law’s declarations regarding the despatch of Allied gold dejwsits to America caused a most unpleasant sensation in political and financial circles. The gold was not the property of tho French Government, but of tho Bank of France, and should not be regarded a,-, a pledge or security. Le Petit Journal comments that yesterday’s explanations resulted in the beginnings of a rapprochement. A change of atmosphere was noticeable. M. Millet, writing in Le Petit Parisian, says : “It is still possible that Mr Bonar Law’s detailed reply will nut a fresh aspect on the debate. Nevertheless no agreement can be concluded. The result will b-e that Franco and Belgium will be unable to avoid a ioint military occupation of Germany’s territory." M. Sauerwein, writing in Lo Matin, says: “Mr Bonar Law seem* to regard a rupture between England and France unmoved. Hitherto he, has made no effort to dissipate legitimate French apprehensions on an essential point. Mr Bonar I,aw has privately expressed his opinion that a rupture is inevitable. , Ho knows that France will be morally forced, under the penalty of losing for over all hope of repairing her ruined lands, to enforce productive guarantees in German territory. Air "Bonar Low. while protesting against the occupation cf tho Ruhr district in order t n conciliate the British ' -' our Party, wishes to maintain the F ' lento on the question of the Near East. M. Sauerwein protests against this inconsistency. He points out that loyal assistance is bchi" given by M- Barrore to Lord Gurznn on Turkish matters.. and" that devoted support is being accorded to Herr I*uuo by Lord D’Abernon. —A. and N.Z. Cable.

A NICE DIFFERENCE. PARIS, January 5. (Received January 5, at 7.20 p.m.) “The Entente exists, but the Entente Cordiale is dead.” This is the keynote of comment in the cafes and on the boulevards to-night.—A. and N.Z. Cable. ENGLISH PRESS COMMENT. LONDON, January 5. (Received January o, at 8.40 p.m.) The Daily Chronicle says: The British proposals are regarded as a question, economically, of how to avoid killing the goose which lays the golden eggs. The French schemb insists on guarantees which would frustrate Germany’s recovery, and therefore cannot' produce reparations. It would reduce Germany to economic and political impotence, with the inevitable result that the sources of reparations would run dry. The break-up of the conference, therefore, is inevitable. Tho Daily Telegraph emphasises the fart that Britain regards reparations solely as a means of obtaining from Germany the maximum pecuniary compensations for the war injuries of I ranee, and desires also to make reparations mean punishment. Neutrals recognise that Mr Bonar Law lias been fighting the battle cf every people to whom participation in settled international conditions is an objective of supremo importance. The naper pays tributes to Mr Bonar Law’s frankness ana honesty. The Morning Post is disappointed that the British Prime Minister offered Franco terms which she could not accept. Tren chantly attacking Mr Lloyd George, it says : Mr Bonar Law is tho victim of his follies. The paper regrets that Mr Bonar Law parted with Franco for what appears to be an entirely unnecessary solicitude for Germany. Germany is to obtain a moratorium without adequate pledges. She is to enjoy a probation which ought to be accorded only to first offenders, and not to a hardened criminal whose creed is still the iron law of necessity. The only way to obtain security from Germany is a pledge so severe that it will not pay her to break it. That i* the system favoured bv M. Poincare, who sees the Treaty of Versailles scrapped, and the existence 6f France threatened bv the Power which launched the thunderbolt in 1914. The Westminster Gazette supports the British proposals, but regards the rupture as a disaster. The Daily Express is against the Frencti policy, and says: In order that Britain may not be involved in any backwash from the French receivership, in regard to the Ruhr Valley, we must remove our army from Cologne. This is a step of vital urgency.—A. and N.Z. Cable. TfTE ENTENTE DOOMED. LONDON. January 5. (Received January 5, at 9.25 p.m.) Tho French Press is generally of the opinion that the Entente is doomed. M. Herve writes in -Viotoire: If this is Air Bonar Law’s last work, it ends the Alliance. M. Tardicu, in Echo National, says: France’s one duty is to seek with thp nations who wish to see international law respected some means of emerging from the present crisis, without AngloSaxon help. Echo Do Paris saire : Mr Bonar Law set himself, before all things, to come to an understanding with America. It hopes he will observe a benevolent attitude to France while she collects German debts. Libert" remarks: To-morrow the Entente will end ; also, two people will then b<> free to pursue, unfettered, their ways. The paper accuses Mr Bonar Law of resorting to the favourite British trick of isolating France. AMERICA’S ATTITUDE. DISCUSSION IX SENATE. WASHINGTON. January 4. Senator Robinson, speaking in the Senate urging the enactment of his Bill providing for representation on the Reparations Commission, declared that the Government and not private bankers, should grapple with Fmropean economic problems, as they affected American industry and tho State. Senator Robinson criticised Mr Hughes’s plan for an unofficial commission as being the abdication by the Government of its powers and obligations to deal with foreign Problems. Congress should authorise the President to appoint an official representative on the Reparations Commission. The Bill was not intended to embarrass the President. It’s purpose was to relieve him from the humiliation imposed on him by big own party associates. “It is essential that the final adjustment of reparations should bo speedily effected. The United States can render effective assistance, and an effort must be made at once. We should not wait until Germany is hopelesslv bankrupt. Hesitation and secrecy should be abandoned. Let the Senate be informed of what has been done, and what the Government proposes to do (o save us from the harm which is inevitable if the present political and economic disturbances in •Europe continue.” Senator Robinson suggested that Colonel Harvey should be called before the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Lodge assured him that all tho information that would assist in dealing with this question could he obtained by tho committee. Immediately upon the receipt of a cable from Paris announcing that the conference had broken up after a. disagreement. Ambassador Harvey conferred with Mr Hughes and President Harding, and cancelled all his engagements so as to devote himself to the consideration of the neVr situation! Senator Johnson, in attacking Senator Robinson’s Bill, declared: “There is too much loose talk in the country about America's dutv in England. The feeling i* that oil tho United States can do to stabilise Europe is to cancel Europe’s debt. There is one thing we can do. Do we want to do it? We can play our part bv forgiving their debt, if you are ready to do it. I am not. There is the road. Will you take it? Dare you lake it? Or will you continue to engage in the same empty talk and nebulous expressions that we have been hearing.” The United Press understands that the United States is nnlikelv to move immediately.—A. and N.Z. Cable. MR. HUGHES’S PROPOSAL. SUPPORTED BY MR LLOYD GEORGE. LONDON, January 4. (Received January 5. at 8.5 p.m.) Mr Lloyd George has telegraphed to the Dailv Chronicle : I* read with gladness Mr Hughes’s important speech suggesting the appointment of a commission of financial experts on reparations. As far as 1 can fudge from the compressed report of Mr Hughes’s remarks, my suggestions travel in tho same direction. All other experiments will merely postpone the mischief which in the long run will have to bo redeemed, “with usurious compound interest. by an embarrassed Europe.—-A. and N.Z. Cable. A NEW PROPOSAL. PARIS, January 4. (Received January 5. ct 8.6 p.m.l Italy’s proposal is to raise 10,000,000,000 gold marks bv an international loan to be used to stabilise the mark and to pay reparations.—A. and N.Z. Cable.

ITALY’S STANDPOINT. ENGLISH PLAN UNACCEPTABLE. ROME, January 4. (Received January b. at 8.5 p.m.) Signor Mussolini reported to his Cabinet that the English plan of dealing with reparations w 0,5 detrimental to Italian interests. The four rears’ moratorium would deprive Italy of her supply of coal and would compel her to purchase coal from England at prices which would further depreciate the Lira. Under the English plan Ualv would bo unable to enforce her claims against the other ex-enemy States. Furthermore, Italy would be compelled to allot England 500.000.000 lire in gold, and to renounce her credits from her minor Allies, and would have no guarantee. that her debt to America would be cancelled. The Cabinet approved of the attitude of the Italian delegation in Paris. —A. and N.Z. Cable.

THE RHINELAND PROBLEM. PARIS, January 4. M. Poincare requested the Ambassador in Washington to inform Mr C. E. Hughes that “tho German proposal for non-aggres-sion against France was clearly undertaken with a view to securing the evacuation cf tho Rhineland before fulfilling the Treatv of Versailles. Her present proposal of non-aggression against France, Italy, apd Britain would leave her free to attack Poland. Czecho-Slov.akia, and even Denmark, to regain her lost territories, and we ehould bo forbidden to come to their aid.”—A. and N.Z. Cable. AMERICAN PRESS COMMENT NO MOVE AT PRESENT. NEW YORK. January 5. (Received January 5, at 10.15 p.m.) The Press, though unanimous concerning tho gravity of the situation arising out of ths rupture at the Prime Ministers’ Conference, shows differing attitudes in considering the result. The World blames France, and says: A terrible resnonsibilitv rests upon her. She has committed herself to measures which, in the opinion practically of the who-’e world, are dangerous, provocative, and self-defeating. The Times point* cut that Mr Hughes knew the conference would fail, and asks: Will America sten in and fulfil the promise contained in his speech?—A. and N.Z. Cable. [The speech referred to is the one in which Mr Hughes suggested an unofficial commission of experts to settle reparations in the event of tho conference failing to reach an agreement.] (Received January '5, at 9.25 p.m.) Tim New York World’s Washington correspondent telegraphs: Tho capital, upon news of the break-up of the Prime Ministers’ Conference, became a city of conferences. Colonel Harvey confers with Senator Lodge, and in turn they confer with President Harding, and then with Mr Hughes (Secretary of State). Senator Robinson visits President Harding, in order to explain his Bill, which will be taken under consideration by the Senate Foreign Relatione Committee immediately. Mr Weeks (Secretary of War) confers with his Under Secretaries, ostensibly on the question of the American*’troops in Germany. Tils suggestion that these troops should be withdrawn is in the air. It is felt that the United States could not well allow France to occupy the Ruhr and allow her own troops to remain, but, on the other- hand, the presence of American troops might be best. It is difficult to say exactly what decisions have been reached among the powers that bo in Washington. There is much discussion, but the understanding is that the ■ United States at present will make no move, but will occupy itself with observing the situation for the time being.—A. and N.Z. Cable. BRITAIN’S AMERICAN DEBT MISSION LANDS- AT NEW YORK. , NEW YORK, January 4; The British Debt Funding Commission of four, headed bv Mr Stanley Baldwin, arrived in the Majestic. They were welcomed by the British Consul-General and the Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury. Mr Baldwin declared; “If we can come to an agreement it will be a cmick one.” The return passages of the Commission are booked for January 20- The • party left immediately for Washington.—A. a-ild N.Z. Cable. FATEFUL MOMENTS, CONFERENCE’S CLOSING SCENES. ' ■ LONDON, January 5. (Received Jan. 5, at 11.20 p.m.) The Daily Express’s Paris correspondent writes: The Conference met at 3 o’clock for an hour, and then adjourned for one and ahalf hours. Finally it broke up at 6.30. It was obvious from the delegates’ face at the adjournment that tihe end was near. The Conference broke over guarantees. Mr Bonar Law’s scheme offered a moratorium without immediate guarantees. M. Poincare would not agree to any moratorium without guarantees. The delegation sat face to face with a hopeless situation. There was a few minutes’ silence. Everyone recognised that a great crisis in the world’s history had been reached, and each delegate feared to speak the fatal word that would mark the termination of long years of an alliance and of common suffering, effort, and trial. M. Poincare fidgeted and was obviously intensely moved. Sir Bonar Law, with eyes on the table, sat motionless. M. Poincare broke the silence, proposing an adjournment for an hour and a-half. Mr Bonar Law quickly sought his hand. AH rose and left the room.—A. and N.Z. Cable. FRANGO-BRIT3SH RELATIONS. M. POINCARE’S ASSURANCE. PARIS, January 5. (Received Jan. 5, at 11.20 p.m.) M. Poincare, in a statement after the Conference, said that, despite the differences of opinion, the sentiment of the French Government and nation towards England would remain unchangedly cordial. M. Poincare added that it was desirable to make it clear that if the differences between Britain and France on reparations were complete and irremediable, their agreements continued upon all the other clauses of the Versailles Treaty. - The rupture was not general, and instruction* had been sent to the French delegates at Lausanne to continue negotiations in full accord with England. Now that the Conference had broken down they were going to convene a meeting of the Reparations Commission and ask it to take action regarding Germany’s non-doliyery of coal* Sir John Bradbury officially informed M. Barthou that he would refuse to take part in the discussion. —A. and N.Z. Cable. SENTIMENTS RECIPROCATED. LONDON. January 5. (Received Jan. 6, at 0.5 a.m.) Mr Bonar Law, in a statement after the breakdown of the Conference, said there were irreconcilable 'differences between France and Britain, but the friendship between the two countries and people* would remain unchanged. The British Government, however, would not take part in or accept any responsibility for France’s actions.—A. and N.Z. Cable, FOREIGN OFFICE STATEMENT. LONDON. January 5. (Received Jan. 5, at 11.20 p.m.) The Foreign Office has issued the full text of a lone and closely-argued British reply to French criticisms at the second sitting of the Conference, hut it throws no light upon the causes of the final disageement. which was due to fundamental considerations, ns outlined in Mr Bonar Law’s first speech. The renlv emphasises that despite her own liability to America, Britain offered to cancel her Allied debts. totalling £1.100,000,000, the burden ' whereof the British taxpayer must bear for, at least a generation.-—-A. and N.Z. Cable.