Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LIVELY ARGUMENT AT GENEVA.

Private Discussions

Resented.

SEEKING ACCEPTABLE FORMULA.

By Cable—Press Association—Copyright. Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.

(Received April 7, 9.30 p.m.) GENEVA, April 7

Lively passages followed the resumption of the proceedings at the Preparatory Commission on Disarmament.

M. de Marinis, apparently feeling slighted by the private discussions between M. Boncour and Viscount Cecil, relating to naval disarmament indicated yesterday, said it would he a mistake to imagine that once an agreement was reached by them, the remainder of the Commission would he prepared to accept that agreement. On the contrary, the delegates would probably refer the matter to their Governments. Viscount Cecil intervened hastily to assure M. de Marinis that there was no intention of forcing upon the Commission any agreement reached

privately. M. de Marinis, not seeming satisfied, M. Boncour rose up and protested that no private negotiations were in progress. He had simply submitted to Viscoulit Cecil in writing, a formula based on yesterday’s discussion. Viscount Cecil, who had previously told the Press that he was negotiating with M. Boncour, remained silent. ,

M. De Marinis continued to argue the point, and the Commission adjourned after two hours’ disputation. Later, Germany submitted a formal proposal demanding the limitation of military material, including rifles, machine guns, and all classes of howitzers, mortars, and other artillery, tanks, and armoured cars, as well as ammunition. The Commission considered the proposals to limit armament expenditure.

Dr. Gibson opposed this proposal on the grounds that it was impracticable and inequitable. He argued in favour of the direct limitation of armaments, and declared that budgetary figures were insufficient criterion of the limitation or otherwise of armaments.

Count Bernstorff also opposed the Budget limitation. The discussion then adjourned.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THD19270408.2.57

Bibliographic details

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 8 April 1927, Page 9

Word Count
285

LIVELY ARGUMENT AT GENEVA. Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 8 April 1927, Page 9

LIVELY ARGUMENT AT GENEVA. Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 8 April 1927, Page 9