GENEVA PROTOCOL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19373, 8 January 1925, Page 11

GENEVA PROTOCOL.

WHAT IT MEANS-. ATTITUDE OF THE DOMINIONS. (Feom Ode Own Cokuespondeht.) LONDON, November ?.7. In the current number of tho Round Table considerable space is devoted to the Geneva Protocol Among other things a statement made by Dr Banos showing the difference between tho former state of affairs under tho Covenant and what would b© the new state of affairs under the Protocol ia quoted. This statement in a few words makes a very complicated document fairly According to the system laid down by the Covenant: 1. Tho dispute arises. 2. In cases whoro norther tho arbitral pro cednre nor the judicial sottlomcnt provided for in Article 13 of the Covenant is applied, tho council moots and discusses the dispute, attempts to effect conciliation, mediation, etc. 3. If it bo ■unsuccessful ana war breaks cut, tho council, if unanimous, baa to express an opinion as to which party is guilty. The members of tho league then decide for themselves whether thia opinion is justified and whether thoir obligations to apply economic sanctions therefore become operative. 4.. it then has, by unanimous decision, to recommend military sanctions. 5. If unanimity cannot be obtained, the council ceasing to take action, each party is practically free to act as it chooses. According to the now system defined in the Protocol, the situation is as follows: — 1. Tho dispute arises. 2. The system of peaceful settlement provided for by tho Protocol comes into play. 3. The council intervenes, and if, after arbitration has been refused, war is resorted to, if tho provisional preventive measures are not observed, etc,, the council decides which party is tho aggressor and calls upon tho signatory States to apply tho sanctions. 4. This decision implies that such sanctions as tho case requires economic, financial, military naval, and air—shall bo applied forthwith, and without further recommendations or decisions. METHODS OF ANOTHER WORLD. The writer of the article goes on to say: “There scorns to bo general agreement amongst those who live on air that unless the British Common wealth ratifies the Protocol no more will be beard of it. Why? Is it not -possible for tho eager spirit of conciliation -which is surging through the nations of the Continent to give life and reality to a Protocol of their own? It ia in a form familiar to tin* European mind, with its traditions of military alliances carrying unlimited obliga--tiona. If tlio decision of the British Commonwealth is in reality to determine tho fate of tho Protocol there can only bo ono explanation. It is that Europe is seeking to stabilise the present political arrangement, of tho Continent by the guarantee of the British navy. “It has never been any part of British policy to sign a blank cheque. In our view it is in tho interests neither of the Commonwealth nor of Europe nor of world peace that we should make thia innovation to-day. , . . It ia our firm conviction that no alternative is acceptable which fails to provide for the free exorcise by the Parliament* and peoples of tho Empire of their judgment us to howto deal with any disturbance of tho peace, or any threat of such disturbance, ou its merits as it arises. That has been Iho guilding principle throughout the political history of the British peoples. The methods of the Protocol belong to another world, and if tor no other reason they should bo rejected.” MR 11. E. HYDE’S SUGGESTION. Mr H. E. Hyde, of Marlborough, whoso draft Peace Treaty was considered by the Third Committee at Genova, iiad an opportunity of placing his opinions before a number of influential guests at the Chatham Dining Club recently. Ho is working for a special object—to prevent tho Empire from being hold up as tho obstacle in tho way of world peace. it is quite obvious, of course, that none of the dominions would agree to tho Protocol in its present form with tho Japanese amendments included.

in the course of his address Mr Hyde said that the great British dominions and tho United .States would not tolerate tho question of their right to control immigration to thoir shores in any shape or form coming before any organisation, international or otherwise, cither for arbitration or yet for discussion, and the League of Nations must be abio to give this assurance when inviting the dominions or the United States to contemplate tho ratification of Urn Protocol. Nothing was more likely to wreck the chances of tho Protocol than doubts or risks of this question. The fate of tho Protocol rested with the British Empire, ami wo should insist on our right, and our power, to inliuence and mould it so that it might servo tho Imst interests ot our Empire and of tho whole world. “ Air Baldwin proved that he recognised tho necessity for the Empire standing together,” 'said Mr Hyde, “when, in his groat Guildhall speech, he promised I hat Groat Britain would examine the Protocol in consultation with tho dominions. In view of tho complexity of the situation, and tho magnitude of tho stop contemplated, I believe it would bo in tho interests of all parties to call an Imperial Conference—-before the Protocol is considered for ratification, cither by any of tho dominions or by_ Great Britain—and ascertain the viewpoint and tho policy of tho Empire as a whole. Then having ascertained the policy of tho Empire, suggest a now conference, to which nil nations will bo invited, to consider iho Protocol in detail. The Protocol to be taken us a basis for discussion only, and not to bo in any way binding.”