MALICIOUS INVENTION

Southland Times, Issue 19511, 10 May 1922, Page 5

MALICIOUS INVENTION

BRITISH THREAT TO FRANCE AN AUTHORITATIVE DENIAL CONFERENCE OUTLOOK GLOOMY. (By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright.) (Australian and N.fc. Cable Association.) LONDON, May 8. In connection with the reported strained interview between Mr Lloyd George and M. Barthou a writer in the Matin, proves this to be without foundation. He says :“ I know the details of the conversation in question. Mr Lloyd George spoke like a broken-down man. He was profoundly distressed, but' never threatened or even hinted at new friendships. Mr Lloyd George admitted that in certain contingencies Anglo-French policy was divergent, but this was a question of fact quite different to a rupture or menace. What irritates him most was the French solidarity with Belgium and above all M. Poincare’s refusal to permit the Allied Council to meet and discuss reparations before May 31. In the House of Commons Mr Chamberlain on Mr Lloyd George’s authority characterised the statement as a malicious invention. Mr Chamberlain, replying to questions, said, (1) He was unable to state when Mr Lloyd George would return ; (2) He had no reason to suppose the discussions at Genoa would imperil the Entente. There had been no change in British policy regarding carrying out the Versailles Treaty. (3) He was not aware that a time limit had been imposed on the Conference. The entire House crying “Don’t answer,” and “Order,” supported Mr Chamberlain’s refusal to reply to a final question if it was a fact as reported in the press that Mr Chamberlain was arranging another holiday conference or conference holidays at San Reno. The Australian Press Association’s Genoa correspondent says the Genoa Conference has begun its fifth week with the gloomiest outlook. Many of those who delivered hopeful speeches on its success belied their faith in it by carrying accident insurance policies in the shape of some sort of trade arrangement either signed or ready for signature. Entente friendships have been badly shaken through rumours of concessions negotiated behind each other’s backs. Undoubtedly rightly or wrongly the oil story has done great mischief. Even the United States which took up a position of splendid isolation against European entanglements has been forced to take action in her trade interests. 'Mr Child, the American Ambassador to Italy, gave a luncheon to Mr Lloyd George and discussed the oil situation. It looks at the moment as if the ideals with which the Conference started are rapidly drifting into a concession bargaining affair. Meanwhile in their beautiful retreat at Rapallo the Russians are considering the memorandum. They can be hardly blamed if they look upon the Conference as a crowded auction room where extremely keen bidding is going on for goods which Russia has at command and. if she should force her price.

BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL CONFIDENCE FRENCH CORRESPONDENTS VERSION LONDON, May 8. (Received May 9,5 A pan.) Mr Lloyd George has recalled Lord Birkenhead to Genoa. Earl Winterton, replying to a question in the House of Commons, eaid the Government had no information regarding reported treaty between Germany, the Ukraine and the Soviet Republic under which a German syndicate was given a monopoly of exploring the industrial resources of the Ukraine. Mr Chamberlain said that the statement which appeared m The Times was a breach of international confidence. He quoted the extracts complained of, including “The Entente between Britain and France is at an end,” and “the Prime Minister’s advisers, especially Lord Birkenhead, have been constantly advising Mr Lloyd George to break with France.” This was a deal of nonsense. (Cheers). Mr Chamberlain said he was aware that the editor of The Times had been staying at French quarters at Genoa, but he had not been in touch with anyone who had authority to speak for the British Government. Members of all parties in the House of Commons are evincing remarkable interest in the Genoa situation, and some alarm lest the Conference break down. Mr Chamberlain and other Ministers were strenuously engaged during question time in satisfying the demands for information. The House displayed impatience at members asking faceteous and trifling questions, and in other ways showed sympathy with Mr Lloyd George. Lord Robert Cecil asked if The Times’s statements were published by the Havas Agency. Mr Chamber’ain replied: “If so, I hope they will also publish my reply. I cannot conceive what public purpose can be served by this publication by a paper which deliberately set out to misrepresent the Premier and mislead the country.” (Cheers)..

Mr Will Thorne: Has the House power to bring the writer to the Bar of the House so that the Speaker can admonish him ? (Loud cheers). Mr Chamberlain did not reply. A French correspondent at Genoa writes to the Daily Telegraph repeating the statement that Mr Lloyd George declared that he could not but interpret the fact that France sided with Belgium against England as an indication that France did not want to remain true to the Entente, and that in future England would consider herself free to contract new friendships if she thought it advisable. “Of course,” the correspondent continues, “the very serious words uttered by Mr Lloyd George have their principal origin in the decision reached by M. Poincare regarding the procedure necessary to solve the German reparation problem. Mr Lloyd George informed M. Barthou that Britain had decided to renounce her share of the reparations due from Germany. “Mr Lloyd George’s and Bir L. Worthington Evan’s meeting with Wirth and Rathenau to-day created the impression that if France, after the 31st. resorts to independent action against Germany, England will perhaps regard herself as free to negotiate a separate agreement with Germany. These developments are a cause of regret in French circles, but it must be remembered that even the average Frenchman does not see the possibility of enforcing even partially the Versailles Treaty, especially the reparation classes, unless Germany is threatened with coercion if she breaks her pledged word. Here and nowhere else is the real parting of the ways between the French and British policies. French cirelee hoped that if the Soviet Government’s reply does not amount to a clear acceptance it will be considered as a refusal, and the Genoa proceedings will be cleared up as soon as possible; this because should the Conference continue to cause a new clash between British and French opinions it would prove more difficult to bridge the gulf between them. I am told that Baron Hayashi and others have successfully proposed the postponement of the Conference.” REPUDIATION BY THE PREMIER. “RAVINGS OF INSANE PERSON.” M. BARTHOU’S DENIAL. GENOA, Msy 8. (Received May 8, 8.15 p.m.) Mr Lloyd George, speaking to pressmen, declared that his reported statement that “The Entente is at md ” was a wicked s invention, and- tiw cawMigß qa insane gw-

son desiring to wreck the Conference. The French delegation were outraged. The future of the Conference depended dn Russia’s answer. If.it were a bona fide basis then he would remain at Genoa. He did not expect a direct “yes” or “no,” and there were difficulties connected with clausa 7 regarding private rights and property rights, but he hoped England and France would work together in the matter. There could be no direct loan by the Allies to the Soviet Government. M. Barthcu also emphatically denies the report of Mr Lloyd George’s alleged statement. In a letter to Mr Lloyd George regarding The Times’s allegations he writes; “You appeal for my testimony regarding last Saturday’s conversations. You did not say that the Entente is at an end, or that your iidvisers were pressing you to make an entente with Germany. You did not say one word to break the friendship between our countries.” STATEMENT BY M. BARTHOU. M. POINCARE AND A FORMULA. PARIS, May 8. M. Barthou told journaliste that the Genoa Conference vras at an end, but this did not mean the end of Franco-British friendship. The “Petii; Parisien” says if the alliance ends future events will probably show England even more than France that her interests are not where she seems to see them today. . I M. Poincare informed Lord Hardinge that he thought he would be able to suggest a formula which would satisfy French and Belgian claims in connection with, the Russian question,. *.

NON-REPRESENTATION OF NEW ZEALAND.

SIR FRANCIS BELL NOT GOING TO GENOA. (United Service). LONDON, May 8. (Received May 9, 9.50 p.m.) The mystery of New Zealand’s non-re-presentation at Genoa deepens. Sir James Alien’s statement on March 14 was followed by the announcement that Sir Francis Bell would iict. On his arrival to-day Sir Francis Bell stated that he considered in the present circumstances it was neither necessary nor desirable that he should attend, and he declined to make a statement on the general question of Australasian representation at such a conference, but said he could announce that he would not attend unless uhe present conference adjourned and was subsequently reconstituted. The real object of the Attorney-General’s visit appeara to be to meet a request by the Colonial Office for a consultation with a New Zealand law officer on several undisclosed matters. Sir Francis Bell will subsequently visit Norway.