SPAIN’S CLAIM

Southland Times, Issue 19966, 4 September 1926, Page 7

SPAIN’S CLAIM

WRANGLE FOR SEATS

DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL “A FIRST CLASS BURIAL.” (By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright.) (Rec. 7.10 p.m.) Geneva, September 2. The League Council discussed Lord Cecil’s amendment, recording that the reorganisation committee did its utmost to satisfy Spain. Delegates urged that special mention of Spain’s claim necessitated mention of Poland’s and China’s. The Chinese delegate declared that China reserved her right to claim a permanent seat. Palacios, the Spanish delegate, demanded an explicit statement that the committee was unable to accede to the Spanish demand for a permanent seat. The discussion was adjourned. Palacios, when interviewed, said he regretted the lateness of the convening of the committee, which gave Spain no time for consideration before the meeting of the Council, but the incident was not yet closed. If the committee recommended a course satisfying Spain, the situation might be changed, otherwise it appeared to be a first-class burial of the Spanish claim. Spain was awaiting the Council’s and the Assembly’s action before her next move.— A. & N.Z. WILL SPAIN SECEDE? NO FINALITY YET. TANGIER CRUX OF SITUATION. (Rec. 8.20 p.m.) London, September 3. “Whether Spain’s action in withdrawing from the Council at Geneva will be followed bv complete secession from the League is not yet certain,” states the Daily Telegraph. “In any case she is obliged to give two years’ notice of her intention.” An authoratative Spanish official informed the Morning Post that Spain would not accept any unguaranteed promise. She was most likely to “go to sleep” pending international Tangier pouparlers. He added that when in possession of Tangier, Spain would resume her League activities, which was very probable within a year. On the other hand, there is good ground for stating that the question of Tangier will not be raised during the League meetings. The Italian representative, Grandi, stated that Italy did not intend to ta’e the intiative in proposing a Tangier conference at Geneva or elsewhere. Messages from Berlin state that Government circles are confident that Germany solely will be admitted. The most reliable information from Spain shows that General de Rivera’s position is unstable and largely dependent on a successful issue of the Tangier Question. He claims that the opposition is not directed against King Alfonso.—A. and N.Z. “SYMPATHIES WITH SPAIN.” Geneva, September 2. Signor Scialoja (Italy) created something like a sensation when he said—“ All our sympathies are with Spain, but objective reasons prevent us giving her our vote and support as we had desired and hoped.” —A. & N.Z. TANGIER QUESTION. FRANCE REPLIES TO SPANISH NOTE. Paris. September 2. The Excelsior states that France’s reply to the Spanish Note says the Tangier question cannot be connected with problems now being discussed at Geneva. It is impossible to draw up a new statute for Tangier since the Act of Algeciras prescribed a permanent international regime; therefore the district should remain under the suzerainty of the Sultan of Morocco but the French Government is willing to discuss with Spain and other States interested means of reorganising the administration of the zone so as to satisfy Spain in every way compatible with the observance of existing treaties.—A. & N.Z. THE COUNCIL MEETING. SPAIN HOLDS ALOOF. Geneva, September 2. Spain’s representative did not attend the League Council meeting.—A. & N.Z. .AMERICA’S ATTITUDE. THE WORLD COURT. ADHERENCE NOT YET CERTAIN. New York, September 1. The New York Times’s Washington correspondent states that the report from Geneva that the League Conference adopted all but the fourth and fifth reservations of the United States Senate’s world court resolution has excited interest here but official circles have made it clear that acceptance of part of the reservations would be insufficient to assure American participation in the court. Any desire interested

nations may have in securing a definition or interpretation of the fifth reservation, which is one to which strenuous objections have been made, will fail of realisation if an appeal is made to the State Department which feels that such would have to come from the Senate alone. Discussion of the fifth reservation in the Senate furnished one of the chief bases of argument against American adherence to the Court, and in

view of the attitude of Senators Borah and Reed, who are now striving to secure nullification of the Senate resolution by speeches all over the country, it is considered unlikely any limitation of this reservation can be secured. —A. & N.Z.