SECURITY MEMORANDUM
THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE. LORD CECIL DISAPPOINTED. London, January 25. Declaring that the Government’s memorandum on security was most disappointing regarding arbitration. Lord Cecil says that the refusal to agree to an “all in” arbitration could not be due to the Government thinking that arbitration was advisable with good people, but wrong with bad. The only other possible conclusion was that the Government preferred to arbitrate rather than quarrel with powerful countries, which was not a very high-minded attitude. “I do not know the ground on which the Goverment argues that the people would not support general arbitration,” he says. “Will the Government subject the question to a free vote in the House of Commons, or ask the League of Nations ro remove such doubts?” Britain’s signature was all embracing, and arbitration would give the world a lead. A persistence with the present attitude was tantamount to maintaining that war was a legitimate method of setting a dispute.—A. and N.Z.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST19280127.2.33
Bibliographic details
Southland Times, Issue 20396, 27 January 1928, Page 7
Word Count
161SECURITY MEMORANDUM Southland Times, Issue 20396, 27 January 1928, Page 7
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Southland Times. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in