WAR DEBTS

Southland Times, Issue 20172, 7 May 1927, Page 7

WAR DEBTS

BRITAIN’S LIABILITY UNITED STATES REPLY TO NOTE DIVERGENCE OF VIEWPOINT MANIFESTED (By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright.) Washington, May 5. Mr Mellon in his statement discusses the situation in the fullest detail. It says—- “ The Treasury Department, discussing payments received from Germany, includes all payments. The British Government confines itself to payments on account of reparations and the Belgian war debt. Under such circumstances there is no disagreement in fact, but failure to join in the issue. We are now urged to cancel war debts because it is alleged they were incurred in a common cause. Neither abroad nor in this country has it been suggested that if this is done we are to be reimbursed for dollars actually expended in France and Britain so that goods and services sold us might constitute their contribution to the common cause.”—A. and N.Z. AMERICA LOOKS FOR MOTIVES. New York, May 5. The New York Times’s Washington correspondent states that in some quarters the belief is expressed that, inasmuch as publication of the British Note coincided with the opening of the International Economic Conference at Geneva, the controversy had been re-opened at that time because of its possible effect upon negotiations. Another suggestion was that Britain’s internal politics might have had something to do with the move and that the war debt problem had been re-opened in the hope of diverting attention from other strictly domestic controversies.—A. and N.Z. PRESS COMMENT IN BRITAIN. MIS-STATEMENTS MUST BE CORRECTED. London, May 5. The newspapers which were taken by complete surprise by the Note to America unanimously approve of the contents. The Times says—“ The last thing desired was a controversy with the United States about the debt which we are steadily discharging, but Mr Mellon’s mis-statements obtained wide currency and cannot be allowed to pass unchallenged. It is particularly regrettable the Secretary of the United States Treasury should have appeared to sacrifice to the demands of domestic politics the scrupulous accuracy he might so easily have observed.” The Daily Chronicle says—“ The Note does its utmost to save Mr Mellon’s face and facilitate his making the amende honorable if he desires.” The Financial Times declares—“ The Note should clear the air anil prevent a recurrence of statements that create and foster harmful misunderstandings.” The Morning Post says—“ The country will heartily approve the Government’s action in stating the facts to the world. British people cannot but feel it is hard they should be openly accused by a member of the United States Government of profiting by a settlement which lowers their whole standard of living whether influenced by domestic exigenices or not. Mr Mellon published to the world erroneous statements which we trust he will see fit to withdraw.” The Daily Telegraph regrets the necessity for the Note, but says—“ The necessity was not the British Government’s making. It has been thrust upon them by Mr Mellon’s extremely serious inaccuracies. It is difficult to compute the prejudice done thereby to Great Britain in Europe.”—A. and N.Z. QUESTION ASKED IN COMMONS. Rugby, May 5. In the House of Commons to-day the Chancellor of the Exchequer was asked whether he was aware that Mr Mellon had repeated the statement that Great Britain was receiving more from the Allied countries than she was paying to the United States and that these statements were doing great harm to British interests in France and Italy. Mr Churchill replied that both by Parliamentary speech and formal note the Government had recorded their views on these transactions. He did not see how in the circumstances the Government could have avoided taking the steps they had taken.—British Official Wireless. CAUSTIC AMERICAN PRESS COMMENT. (Rec. 8.0 p.m.) Nev/ York, May 5. Editorial opinion on the Debt Note differs, the greater part being opposed to the British attitude, and in some cases this criticism is caustic. The New York American says: “Mr. Mellon does not see why American taxpayers should be charged 160 million dollars per year in order to make Mr. Churchill the matinee idol of the League of Nations.” The New York Times says: “Just now to the common man, war debts look like a great asset, but if it finally penetrates his mind that they are a large part of the national liability, not only hurting our foreign trade but hurting our prestige, and impairing goodwill towards us, he will be more ready than he is to-day to reconsider and rearrange these debts.” The Chicago Tribune captions its leading article “Incomprehensible Impertinence,” and says: Mr. Baldwin would have been red in the face for two days if he received through his Foreign Office a Note from the American Ambassador requesting his Government to disavow the truthful statement of the British question by Mr. Winston Churchill in a letter to an Oxford professor. M. Poincare might have sent the British Ambassador home if such a Note reached him.—A. <fc N.Z. INCIDENT OFFICIALLY CONSIDERED CLOSED. (Rec. 9.30 p.m.) Washington, May 5. While it was made clear that the British Debt Note incident is now considered closed, it is emphasised in well-informed quarters that this should not necessarily be accepted as an attempt to re-open the British-Amer-ican debt agreement, and if reconsideration of this agreement is to be sought, it will be some time in the future and under quite different procedure. It is admitted, however, that the matter is not at rest in this country. The exchange of Notes may cause ill-feeling throughout the country, but it is generally felt that it is only a temporary flurry and that now a calmer view of the whole matter can be taken. —A. and N.Z. NOTHING MORE CAN BE DONE. (Rec. 8.30 p.m.) London, May 5. In the House of Commons, asked if he was aware that Mr Mellon had repeated his statement that Britain was receiving from the Allied countries more than she was paying to America, which had done great harm to British interests in France and Italy, Mr Winston Churchill said: “There is nothing we can do more than what we already have done.” The reply had obtained great publicity, which was regrettable from some points of view, but he could not see how in the circumstances they could have avoided taking steps they did. The world must be the final judge.”—A. and N.Z. and Sun.