RECKLESS FRANCE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 18786, 21 May 1923, Page 5

RECKLESS FRANCE

GERMANY’S FACE SLAPPED CONSEQUENCES OF ACTION >. MR LLOYD GEORGE’S OPINIONS Mr Lloyd George in his nineteenth article writes: ‘ ‘ The French and Belgian Governments have slapped another opportunity in the face; to make that slap resound as well as sting, they have accompanied their rejection of the German offer by a savage sentence of fifteen years’ imprisonment on the head of the greatest industrial concern in the Ruhr, if not in Europe. What for? Because he ordered the work’s siren to sound ‘cease work’ for one day when the French troops occupied the place. ’ ’ By Telegraph.—Press Association. —Copyright. LONDON, May 19. Mr Lloyd George goes on to say:— There is a swagger and brutality about that sentence which betokens recklessness. It came at a moment when the German Government had just made an offer of peace and when Britain was urging the French Government to treat that offer at least as the starting point for discussion. The answer was to treat the German Note as an offence and to promulgate a penal sentence which was an outrage to every sense of decency throughout the world, and to refuse to permit an ally, who has been so faithful in time of trouble, even the courtesy of discussion on the tenour of the reply to be given. Prussian arrogance in its crudest days can furnish no such example of clinisy, short sighted ineptitude. REPARATION PAYMENTS. “Hitherto there lias been a common ground that £2,500,000,000 is the figure which Germany can be expected to pay. France and Belgium are now insisting on the full measure of the £6.G0j,000,000 award. They scoff at Mr Hughes’ proposal and treat Germany’s action in putting it forward as “an expression of systematic revolt against the Treaty of Versailles.” An impossible payment is insisted on, the costs of the occupation are to be added to that, and until both are liquidated, French armies are to remain in occupation of the richest areas of Germany. Meanwhile the British Empire and the United States, who at prodigious cost of life and treasure, saved France from a humiliation similar to that which she is now inflicting upon Germany, are practically told when they venture to offer suggestions, to mind their own business. BASIS FOR NEGOTIATIONS “The sum offered by Germany is no doubt inadequate and cannot be accepted by any of the Allies in discharge of Germany’s treaty obliga- i tions. I have no doubt the Germans I meant the offer to be taken as a basis for negotiation. The refusal to meet in conference until the figures proposed are acceptable rules out any discussion between the parties as a means of coming to terms on the main question in dispute. Goodwill can bridge any abyss; unconditional surrender, if insisted upon between independent bodies, is sure to be the prelude to fresh disputes. The mere fact, therefore, that Germany puts forward a proposal which falls short of the equities of the case is not a sufficient reason for declining a conference to determine what the right sum should be. MR HUGHES’ OFFER “Furthermore, the Germans proposed an alternative which was virtually an acceptance of Mr Hughes’ famous Ncwhavcu suggestions. Mr Hughes made it clear that the United States was prepared to assist in such an inquiry. It seemed to me a supreme opportunity for placing the vexed question which was fretting Europe almost into nervous paralysis, on the pathway leading to a real settlement. The more I think of that proposal, the more I am convinced it is right, and the more I am perplexed by the rude indifference with which it was treated by the Allied Governments. I can understand those who wish to exploit reparations for ulterior purposes being anxious to keep America out of the business, but why did Britain, Italy and Belgium neglect this chance of securing the assistance of the one power which could have been helpful in reaching a fair and sound decision. To declare, as the French Note does, that Mr Hughes’ proposition abrogates the Versailles Treaty is to ignore provisions of that Treaty. As a matter of fact, it would be a restoration of the Treaty which relegated the question of the amount which Germany should pay to an Allied Commission on which America was represented. The withdrawal of the only country with no direct interest in reparations, left the commission a lopsided and Jiighly prejudiced tribunal. Therefore, it is essential that America should be represented on the tribunal that fixes the payments to be exacted from Germany. The German Government can npw offer to submit the fate of their country to the unaltered : clauses of the Treaty. France and Beli'gium have no right, in honour, to demand submission to any other, because they insist upon enforcing something entirely different from the contract entered into in 1919. Europe is disquieted and international relations are saturated with an inflamable spirit of resentment, hatred and revenge. No wonder Marshall Foeh is touring Central Europe to put the Allied armies in order. He seems to me tp be the one man in France who has an understanding of what all this is leading up to.”