LIMITATION OF ARMAMENTS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXII, Issue 19435, 22 October 1925, Page 8

LIMITATION OF ARMAMENTS

PROPOSED EUROPEAN CONFERENCE APPROVED BY PRESIDENT COOLIDGE WASHINGTON, Oct. 20. President Coolidge believes that the European conference for the limitation of European armaments would be very useful and hopes the nations concerned will call a conference. He says that while a reduction of armies is peculiarly a European problem, it will be necessary to include the United States in any conference on President Coolidge’s suggestions for naval limitations.

AMERICA IN THE COLD STANDING WITH RUSSIA AND MEXICO WASHINGTON, Oct. 20. The “New York World’’ says: The nations of Europe have taken 'our advice and have sought, through concessions and the subordination of war psychology to that of peace, to pave the way for radical reduction of armaments. At Locarno they made a tremendous advance. , The agreements there entered into are interwoven with the operations of the League of Nations, and we, with Russia and Mexico, refuse to co-operate with the League. We have made a great point of having ‘nothing to do with abroad.’ It is not surprising that under tho circumstances abroad there should be but little confidence in us. That the European countries will now proceed w;ith other conferences on the armament question may be assumed from the logic of the situation and it would be rather impertinent of us with our record to claim the right of leadership in such a movement. We cast our lot with Russia and Mexico, and mankind may bo able to work out its salvation without our assistance or further interference.’’

“THE PRESIDENT IS WISE’’ ANOTHER VIEW NEW YORK, Oct. 20, Tho “Evening World,’’ which consistently championed the late President Wilson's policies, under the heading “The President is Wise’’ says: “I,t appears that the President has no intention of calling a disarmament conference as a result of an agreement reached without our assistance or any suggestion from our unofficial observers at Locarno. This is a sensible conclusion, if not the only one we could, well reach without making ourselves ridiculous. We have done little since the armistice to advance tho cause of world peace, and .we have concerned ourselves consistently in efforts to discourage the functioning of tho only really serious organisation in history perfected for the purpose of reducing the possibilities of war, and finding peaceable ways of settling international disputes.”