FRANCE AND GERMANY.

Otago Witness, Issue 3610, 22 May 1923, Page 18

FRANCE AND GERMANY.

THE GERMAN OFFER. TEXT OF BRITISH REPLY. LONDON, May 13. The complete summary of the Britisn Note reads as follows:—“Germany’s proposals came as a great, disappointment, and the unfavourable im pression which they had created among the British and Allied Governments should have been foreseen and guarded against. The German proposals far from corresponded, either in form or in substance, with what Great Britain might reasonably have expected. Germany offered a sum far below the moderate amount which formed the basis of the scheme that Britain submitted to the Paris Conference in January, and it was a total which Germany must have known in advance to bo altogether unacceptable. ‘‘Even this inadequate sum was dependent upon the issue of a series of international loans, the success of which in the circumstances predicated must be largely speculative. Moreover, Germany had pro posed arrangements in connection with these loans which involved less burdensome conditions on Germany if the loans were unsuccessful than if they were successful. Therefore the proposal did not contain an incentive to Germany to itiempt to raise loans. “Germany s failure to indicate more pro cisely the nature of the guarantees which she was disposed to offer was particularly regrettable. Britain was persuaded that Germany, in her own interests, would see the advantage of displaying a greate readiness to grapple with'the realities of the case, and would proceed to reconsider and expand her proposals, converting them into a feasible basis for discussion. In such a discussion Britain, at a suitable moment, would be ready to participato by the side of her Allies, with whom she shared a practical interest in a question which she had no intention of abandon ing; but the first step towards terminal;

ing the present situation of international peril must ba a more serious and precise contribution from Germany than had hitherto been forthcoming.’’ i'he British Note in reply to the German offer states : Even this inadequate sum was dependent upon the issue of a series of international loans, the success of which in the circumstances predicated must be largely speculative. Moreover, Germany had proposed arrangements in connection with these loans which involved less burdensome conditions on Germany if the-loans were unsuccessful than if they were successful. Therefore the proposal did not contain an incentive to Germany to attempt to raise loans. Secondly, Germany s failure to indicate more precisely the nature of the guarantees which she was disposed to offer was particularly regrettable. Britain was persuaded that Germany in her own interests would see the advantage of displaying a greater readiness to grapple with the realities of the case, and would proceed to reconsider and expand her proposals, converting them into a feasible basis for discussion. In such a discussion Britain, at a suitable moment, would be ready to participate by the side of nev Allies with whom she shared a practical interest in a question which she had no intention of abandoning, but the first sten towards terminating the present situati m of international peril must be a moie serious and precise contribution from G ::v----many than had hitherto been forthcoming OFFER NOT A BASIS FOR DISCUSSION. ROME, May 13. Signor Mussolini’s Note reiterates ui.it reparations and inter-Allied debts are inseparable, and expresses willingness to support Italy’s share of the sacrifices :n order to ensure an economic settlement, but declares that Germany’s offer does not afford a basis for inter-Allied discussion. WELCOMED IN PARIS. PARIS, May 13. Official circles welcome the British an! Italian denunciation of the German offer

as unacceptable and unworthy of discussion . The Paris press generally approves of the British and Italian replies. ORDERED TO LEAVE GERMANY. BRUSSELS, May 14. A message from Cologne says that Frau Krupp has been ordered to leave occupied Germany within four days. BERLIN, May 15. Democratic members of the Reichstag, commenting on the British Note, distinctly favour a resumption of negotiations. Count Bernstoit said : “The negotiations ought and must continue. Everything else is a matter of indifference to me, because otherwise the situation will be unbearable for Europe." Herr Sehiffer said: ‘‘Though the Note has roused bitter feelings, these must be suppressed, and the framework of the last proposals should be formulated with concrete ones. These should be formulated by German business men, who should not leave everything to the Government. ' Herr Hoetesch said : ‘Conservative Germany should only reply to England and Italy.” A decision is not expected before the end of tho week. OCCUPATION AREA EXTENDED. BERLIN, May 15. It is reported from Ludwigshaven that a Spa-hi regiment from Treves bas occupied the Baden aniline factory. There are large concentrations of French troops at Ludwigshaven and Greusheim. The streets are crowded with infantry, cavalry, and artillery. THE JAPANESE REPLY. PARIS, May 16. The Japanese reply to Germany says : “Japan is unable to approve of the amount proposed as reparations or of the method of payment, but, in view of the fact that Japan’s interest in the matter is not so vital as that of the other Allies, Japan refrains from commenting on the details of the German proposalbut Japan

hopes that the German Government will take proper steps with a view to facilitating a speedy and amicable settlement of the whole question of reparations on an equitable basis.” FURTHER Oh FEE FORESHADOWED. LONDON, May 17. The Morning Post’s Berlin correspondent says: “Dr Cuno (the Chancellor) received separately the leaders of all the Reichstag parties, and discussed with them the British and Italian Notes and the question of Germany’s reply. Dr Cuno refused a request by the Socialists to make an announcement in the Reichstag prior to the Whitsuntide adjournment. He admitted that he was collecting information in Loudon and Rome with a view to despatching a further Note to the Allies. All the parties, except the Extreme Right, pronounced in favour of making more precise offers of guarantees. They were united also in expressing their intention of supporting the Government, and this makes an alternative Government impossible. The Socialist Party is strongly pressing for a speedy settlement, and the earliest possible evacuation of the Ruhr, realising that the workers cannot continue their passive resistance indefinitely. Herr Mueller (one of the plenipotentiaries who signed the Treaty of Versailles) is urging the rich industrialists and farmers to assist with substantial guarantees.’' SEIZURE OF DYE WORKS. NITRATES I- ROM THE AIR. PARIS, May 17. The French seizure of the Badische aniline works at Ludwigshaven (Rhineland) has aroused intense interest, because the works, since 1913, have specialised in the manufacture of synthetic ammonia from ordinary air under the Haber process, which makes Germany practically independent of foreign supplies of nitrates for fertilisers. The French Government, by virtue of an agreement arising from Article 297 of the Treaty of Versailles, obtained in 1919 the right to use the Haber process, and the Government powder factory at Tonlouse is being transformed for the manufacture of nitrates from the air on a. large scale. When these works operate France expects to be independent of foreign fertilisers. M. POINCARE SATISFIED. PARIS, May 18. M. Poincare has issued a statement showing that the cost of tho occupation of the Ruhr to May 1 totalled 63,650,000 francs. The receipts from customs, export licenses, forests and fines amounted t 36,000,000 francs. The coal and coke seized in the same period were estimate’' to be worth 36,680,000 francs. The position is therefore satisfactory, as the receipts exceeded the expenditure, a.nd ps the coal and coke yields are showing a continual increase. MR LLOYD GEORGE'S VIEW. [The following anti all of Mr Lloyd George’s articles are copyright by the United Press Association in America (all countries), copyright in Australia and New Zealand by the Australian Press Association, copyright in Britain by the Daily Chronicle. Reproduction in full or part is prohibited.] LONDON, May 17. Mr Lloyd George in his latest article writes : “The French and Belgian Governments have slapped another opportunity in the face. To make that slap resound ae well as sting they have accompanied their rejection of the German offer by a savage sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment on toe head of the greatest industrial concern in the Ruhr, if not in Europe. What for? Because he ordered the syren to sound ‘ Cease work ’ for one day when the French troops occupied the place. “ There is a swagger and brutality about that sentence which betokens recklessness. It came at a moment when the German Government had just made an offer of peace, and when Great Britain was urging the French Government to treat that offer at least as a starting point for discussion. The answer was to treat the German Note as an offence and to promulgate a penal sentence which was an outrage to every sense of decency throughout the world, and to refuse to permit an ally- who had been so faithful in the time of trouble, even the courtesy of a discussion on the tenor of the reply to oe given. “ Prussian arrogance in its crudest days can furnish no such example of clumsy and short-sighted ineptitude.