REPARATIONS

Wairarapa Daily Times, 12 January 1932, Page 5

REPARATIONS

TWO EXPEDIENTS THE LAUSANNE CONFERENCE. .Press Association Electric Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, Monday. The 1 ‘ Observer ’ ’ says Dr. Bruening ’s declaration has received very careful consideration from Cabinet. Cabinet’s alternatives are acceptance of an extended moratorium of the continuance of the Lausanne Conference in the late spring, with a view to a definite and final settlement. The political clement at Whitehall inclines to the former expedient; financial and banking circles to the latter. Foreign opinion, believing that Lausanne is now unnecessary, considers that an international conference might profitably discuss the effect, of Germany’s new attitude on American debt repayment.

“A CLOSED BOOK.”

MR. LANSBURY’S COMMENT,

LONDON, Monday.

“Britain should tell the world she does not intend to take any further part' in haggling about reparations or war debts.” Mr George Lansbury (Leader of the Labour Party) declared. “Henceforward, she ought neither to receive nor pay out. The whole matter for us is a closed book.”

CANCELLATION COST.

AMERICAN PROFESSOR’S CLAIM

LONDON, Monday

Mr James Harvey Rogers, Professor of Political Economy at Yale University, declares that the cost of a general cancellation of war debts would fall on America, which should receive in 1932 £48,000,000, increasing to one hundred million in 1984. Nevertheless, Mr Rogers considers that America, following on the Hoover moratorium, will cancel the debts, which are a burden to Europe and a doubtful blessing to the United States. Meanwhile, she could use the debts to bargain with other countries for lower tariffs on American goods.

FRENCH ATTITUDE

CONCILIATORY SPIRIT,

PARIS, Sunday

In a statement to Pressmen, M. P. E. Flandin, Minister of Finance, declared that the Lausanne Conference would be “useless if it were preceded by such declarations, because it was impossible siinultantously to destroy France’s rights and seek her collaboration.”

Lobby opinion supports this view, adding that if Germany lias decided to default, the creditors ought immediately to' confer with a view to common action. M. Flandin added that Dr. Bruening’s statement was tantamount to ending the Young Plan and the Versailles Treaty, but no Frenchman could accept a unilateral renouncement of conventions involving the destruction of the sacred right of reparations. Nobody contested the gravity of the world crisis or the necessity of the adjustment of intergovernmental payments. France was at present studying in a conciliatory spirit formulas for alleviation, but it would render the crisis insurmountable if fresh attacks .on contracts caused capital to have further reasons for non-confidence. The French newspapers join in the condemnation of Germany. The “Journol des Debats” says that Germany is certainly preparing to tear up the Versailles Treaty, which must not be allowed. The ‘ ‘ Soil- ’’ urges that Britain and France show a united front to Germany. The “Intransigeant” says that the declaration is significant, following Herr Hitler’s interview with Dr. Bruening. It may be one of the conditions Hitler laid down.

ECONOMIC PRESSURE.

LONDON, Sunday.

In contrast with, the comparative calmness with which Britain regards Dr. Bruening’s declaration, “Le Temps” describes it as an act of folly. “If this attitude is adopted at Lausanne, it marks the end of all rules forming the basis of relations between civilised peoples. It will destroy international order. Such action will cause countries to lose all confidence in the possibility of rehabilitating a nation to which all treaties and agreements are only scraps of paper.” Emphasising M. Flandin’s intention not to attend the Lausanne Conference if Dr. Bruening persists in his attitude, “Pertinax,” in the “Echo de Paris,” advocates economic pressure on Germany by France. “The German economic system hangs by a thread. If necessary all assistance, direct or indirect, must be refused.” The,“Daily Mail,” in a leader, discounts the theory that Dr. Bruening is bargaining. “His pronouncement means what it says. It isth e naked truth that Germany cannot pay. France might be willing to afford temporary relief, but is not prepared to go as far as Dr. Bruening wishes. It is the memory of her ravished lands and resultant sacrifices which prevents France from subscribing to Britain’s policy of cancelling war debts and reparations, especially while America is obstinate.”

The “Daily Herald,” in an outspoken editorial, says that Dr. Bruening merely bluntly announced what nine out of ten people have long since realised was the inevitable course of events. It has been an elaborate game of pretence, a gigantic childish makebelieve. Everybody has known that the Young Plan is dead. The French are naturally scandalised and are apt to exhibit a slightly hysterical prudishness on these occasions. Britain will not tolerate the coercion of Germany into payments.”

“CANNOT PAY’’ STATEMENT. FRENCH PROTEST. (Received Tliis Day, 11.50 3.111.) PARIS, Monday. M. Laval saw the German Ambassador and, it is understood, protested against Dr. Bruening's “cannot pa}, statement, pointing out that it was issued at a most inopportune time m view of the Lausanne discussions. Republicans are urging the Government to declare that if reparations are not received from Germany, there be no war debt payments to America and Britain. M. Laval is expected to publicly reply to Dr. Bruening, after a Cabinet discussion of the Young Plan. Bonds dropped on the Bourse from 463 to 437 francs.