THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16471, 6 July 1921, Page 5

THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

A NCLO-J APAN ESE TREATY. MAJORITY FAVOUR RENEWAL. By T«l*rr«ph—Pr«M A««oci*tiec—Copyrlfkl Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. (Received July 5 t 10.50 p.m.) LONDON, July 4. The preliminary discussion on the Anglo-Japanese Treaty has been completed. In addition to set speeches, matters were thrashed out in conversation. Though no official draft of the new proposals was before delegates, these will be framed from the views presented during the controversy, being debated in detail when the matter comes up again. Secrecy is observed, but private conversations suggest the trend of feeling. Taking the basis of the 1911 treaty, ib is safe to say that expression was divided as follows : On the general principle—Five for : one against. On the preamble with modifications necessary—(a) The consolidation and maintenance of the general r»eac e in the regions of Eastern Asia and of India.— Six for. (b) The preservation of the common interests of all Powers in China* dj ensurin'* the independence and integrity of the Chinese Empire, and the principle of equal opportunities for the commerce and industry of all nations in China.—Six for. (f) The maintenance of the territorial rights of the High Contracting Parties in the regions of Eastern Asia and of India, and the defence of their special interests in the said regions. —* ive for ; one against. Article I. It is agreed that whenever, m the opinion of either Great Britain or Japan, any of the rights and interests referred to in the preamble of this agreement are in jeopardy, the two Governments will communicate with one another fully and frankly, and will consider in common the measures which should be taken to safeguard those menaced rights and interests.—Five for; one against. Article ll.—lf by reason of an unprovoked attack or aggressive action, wherever arising, on the part of any other Power or Powers, either High Contracting Party should be involved in war, tor defence of its territorial rights or special interests mentioned in the preamble of this agreement, the other High Contracting Party will at once come to the assistance of its ally, and will conduct the war in common and make peace in mutual agreement with it.—Four for; two against. Article lII.—-The High Contracting Parties agree that neither of them will, without consulting the other, enter into separate arrangements with another Power to the prejudice of the objects described in the preamble of this agreement.—Four for; two against. Article IV.—Should either High Contracting Party conclude a treaty of general arbitration with a third Power, it is agreed that nothing in this agreement shall entail upon such contracting party an obligation to go to war with the Power with whom such treaty of arbitration is in force. —Six for. « Article V.—The conditions under which armed, assistance shall be afforded by either Power to the other in the circumstances mentioned in the present agreement, and the means by which such assistance is to be made available, will be arranged by the naval and military authorities of the High Contracting Parties, who will from time to time consult one another fully and freely upon all questions of mutual interest.—Four for; two against. Modifications to Article VI. are to be submitted. At present it reads as follows: “ The present agreement shall come into effect immediately after the date of its signature, and remain in force for ten years from that date. In case neither 6f the High Contracting Parties should have notified twelve montns before the expiration of the said ten years the intention of terminating it, it shall remain binding until the expiration of one year from the day on which either of the High Contracting Parties shall have denounced it. But if, when the date fixed for its expiration arrives, either ally is avtuallv engaged in war, the alliance shall, ipso facto, continue until peace is concluded.'’ Asked if he noticed the newspaper discovery that the treaty would continue unless denounced, and even then for twelve months, Mr Hughes replied that he was under no misapprehension. NAVAL DEFENCE. BRITAIN’S POINT OF VIEW. LONDON, July 4. The Japanese Treaty being temporarily disposed of, the Conference considered naval defence. Britain’s standpoint was presented first, Mr Lloyd George, Mr Chamber lain and Mr Churchill addressing the delegates. It was pointed out that while prepared to defend outposts as far as possible, Britain was unable to guarantee that in time of war every dominion would be inviolate. The Motherland did not desire to shirk her responsibilities or unload the cost on to others, or retract anything previously undertaken. However, the situation was complicated. The dominions were once colonies, and before that were settlements. Now they were great nations. The only way to obtain a settlement of the question was frankly to discuss with the dominion leaders what they wanted, and discovering wliat Britain could do. The proposals made had been carefully considered for some time by Britain, and confidential statements had been prepared regarding the various fighting services. These were critically examined from the point of view of Imperial defence as a whole, and co-ordinated bv the Sub-committee on Imperial Defence, sitting under the president of the Council of Defence-, with the object of devising a practical scheme effective in time of war. The British Government did not desire to dictate the movements of dominion troops. That was a matter for the decision of the respective Governments. The measure of cooperation would be reflected in the subsequent discussion. MR HUGHES’S SPEECH. I DOMINIONS MUST ACCEPT SHARE OF RESPONSIBILITY. Mr Hughes pointed out Australia’s dependence on sea power, outlinin'- the efforts made for self-defence under Admiral Sir Reginald Henderson’s scheme. He intimateathat the Commonwealth* spent on naval defence much more than all the otlilbr dominions put together, yet Australia’s navv was not effective to defend her. There was not even a plan of campaign so far as lie knew. Australia depended for existence upon Britain’s control of the seas, -et Britain declared that she was unable to maintain a navy of relative pre-war j

strength. The dominions should ac cept their share of responsibility. Axis tralia was ready to shoulder hers. It is understood that Mr Hughes jju forward certain proposals on the line? already cabled. It seems likelv that : heavy subsidy will be vided adequate strength is maintained in the China Squadron and other forces, with a base in Australia am New Zealand, co-operating with exist ing ships of the Commonwealth fleet, which will be kept in a state of efficiency. Facilities for dockyard and refitting bases also are set out. togethe* with a statement o? the amount scent on preparatory work under the Hen derson scheme, and nn estimate of the sum required to complete it. It is understood that Mr Hughes i‘ determined not to commit Australia to expenditure. The proposals will be submitted to Parliament first.

NEW HEBRIDES. CONDOMINIUM OPPOSED BY MR HUGHES. LONDON. July 4. The New Hebrides question is now commanding great attention. Mr Hughes openly supports the proposal that the British and French Governments should arrange an understanding by which the condominium should be abolished, control passing either to Britain or Australia.