Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

AGREEMENT ON PACT FLATLY REJECTED

EFFECT OF KELLOGG S ENTRY INTO DEBATE (By Telegiaph —Per Press Assn.—Copyright.) [ Australian ’’ress Assn. 1 WASHINGTON, Jan. 8. Mr F. B. Kellogg, backed by president Coolidge, to-day entered tne Senate Treaty controversy, with the result that the pending agreement, which appeared hopeful, was turned, down 1 atly. Therefore, the debate must continue. The reservationists are prepared to harass the Administration for ‘‘failure to protect the rights of the United States. ” Mr Kellogg’s ntry as spokesman for Mr Coolidge became known at a conference oi Senators after which Senator Borah announced he could not accept the proferred unanimous consent to the agreement, because Mr Kellogg inusted on having the Treaty ratified without even the committee of tne Senate explaining that, according to its understanding, the Pact does not limit the American right of self-def'nee or curb the Monroe Doctrine. The refusal of the agreement to which Senator Reed (the Paet’s chief enemy) assented to-day, has intensified the feeling of the reservationists against the Pact, and particularly spurred them to att T ' Mr Kellogg because of his entry into the Senate situation and his domination of the moves of the Pact’s sponsors. Senator Moses, in the Senate, urged that the Pact legalised wars : nstcad of abolishing them- He urged that the exemptions set forth by adhering European nations would lind the United • States to recognition of their secret self-defence treaties. He characterised Mr Kellogg’s activities as ‘‘lmperious impatience which is well known to us who have seen him display it. here.’' He said that the Treaty amounted to an abandonment of any possibility of neutrality by United States. “It means,” he said, “that in any war involving great European Powers, the United States would be in no position to contend for the freedom of the seas. It would mean a triumph of the historic British claim to ignore neutral interest-.”

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WC19290110.2.48

Bibliographic details

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 72, Issue 8, 10 January 1929, Page 7

Word Count
314

AGREEMENT ON PACT FLATLY REJECTED Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 72, Issue 8, 10 January 1929, Page 7

AGREEMENT ON PACT FLATLY REJECTED Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 72, Issue 8, 10 January 1929, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert