BONAR LAW’S WARNING.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16918, 18 December 1922, Page 8

BONAR LAW’S WARNING.

ACCEPTED IN GOOD SPIRIT.

Jly Telegraph—Pre** Association—Copyright United Service. (Received December IS. D. 30 a.m.) JLONDOM. December 17. The French Press accepts Mr Bonar 1 iPw s warning regarding reparations in good spirit. The “ Bet it Pari-ien " says: ” The problem of French politics to-day is to know to what degree to take into consideration the difficulties of out sincere ally when it is necessary for us to give definite terms to our schemes.” " L’Oeuvre ” says: “This warning, that Britain refuses to be concerned :ii the occui>ation of the Ruhr is more trenchant, ljecau.se it is submitted with moderation and cordiality.” “ Le Petit Journal ” declares “ Mr Bonar Law's cautious and significant declarations deserve xbe greatest attention. 'He warned France that she n-jghl. by separate action, make the existence of a Conservative Cabinet in London difficult, it not impossible. In ctfier words, a policy of friendly collaboration with Britain presupposes tifiprocal concessions from Franco.”

Speaking in the House of Commons last week, Mr Bonar Law said it could not he right that wc alone should pav as the result of the war without receiving anything. It would reduce the standard of living in this country for a generation to place on the taxpayers r burden of which no one had any conception. We could, not do it. We had leached a sound Budgetry position at the expense of heavy taxation. Wo could not afford to bo as generous as some foreign countries supposed. Unless there was a distinct improvement in trade we should be worse off than any of our Allies in regard to reparation. Germany was free from the terrible internal debt which burdened us, but all the information hr had received was to the effect that Germany was very near a complete collapse. There cruld not be any improvement there until the mark was stabilised, yet in in the opinion of every economist every * ffort to stabilise the mark would bring about that collapse Germany could, by passive resistance, avoid payment lor ever, but it would mean national ‘hicidr. The British Government could not view- with equanimity the suggested occupation of the Ruhr. It would make reparation more difficult. perhaps impossible. There war almost no liojk* of a solution of the problem unless France and Great Britain acted together.