DEATH BLOW?

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 232, 1 October 1928, Page 7

DEATH BLOW?

ANGLO-FRENCH PLAN.

Effect Of America's Rejection Of Anglo-French Plan.

FUTURE ACTION OBSCURE,

(Australian Press Assn.—United Service.)

LONDON", September 30.

A message from Paris says the Note from the United States Government was received at the Quai d'Orsay just as MM. Berthelot and Briand (Foreign Minister), were leaving for the Spanish Embassy to lunch "with King Alfonso.

M. Berthelot took the Note and translated it while he was in the ear with M. Briand. The latter is reported to have remarked: "Then the naval compromise is dead."

The French newspapers are divided. Some express the opinion that the compromise will survive Mr. F. B. Kellogg's anaesthetic, and others inscribe its epitaph.

Neither Britain nor France is regarded as likely to send an early reply to the American Note. The French Foreign Office especially emphasises that there is no need for haste. It says the naval experts have already many months of work ahead.

The British Foreign Office explains that the matter must be considered by the Cabinet, and that the subject matter of the Note concerns not one but a number of Departments. Nor are there any signs of the publication of the text of the Anglo-French agreement.

It is stated in Paris that the publication has been delayed owing to British objections. The "Daily Telegraph" says that in the first place no copy was supplied of the original Note addressed to the United States Government, to which the reply has now been issued. This is contrary to the usual procedure.

An inquiry at the foreign Office on Friday evening elicited the fact that there is no intention of publishing the British Note, at any rate at present. It was added that the American Note contains all the facts.

Secondly, says the "Telegraph," the United States Government never received the full text of the AngloFrench agreement, but only a summary of it. Twice it asked for elucidations and explanations which might not have been necessary if the full text had been supplied.

The United States Embassy in London issued the Note on its own initiative. It was not issued by the Foreign Office.

The "Telegraph" expresses the opinion that the Anglo-French proposals have been killed by the American reply, as they were certain to be killed.

The "Times" says the motives of Britain are evidently not yet fully understood in America, but the Washington and Geneva conferences, and all that has happened since, were in the nature of a preliminary investigation into the big question of the relation between naval armaments and security in the modern world. This inquiry will bear fruit in time. The absence of immediate results is not a condemnation of the sincere efforts which have been made to achieve them.

GERMAN VIEW.

NEW CONFERENCE PROBABLE, j (Australian and N.Z. Press Association.) (Received 10.30 a.m.) BERLIN, September 30. Political papers are keenly interested ia the American Note which they believe may lead to a new conference on naval disarmament. The "Berliner Ta£reblatt" says the United States has built a golden bridge for England, and the Conservatives should be glad to be let off so easily in view of the forthcoming general election.

AMERICA PLEASED.

AT RECEPTION OP NOTES

(Australian and N.Z. Press Association.)

WASHINGTON, September 30.

The Washington correspondent of the "New York Times" says officials in the capital are pleased with the first reactions in Britain and France to the American reply about the FrancoBritish naval proposals. They say the next step must now be taken by those two Governments.

Gratification is felt that the British Press quite generally has commended the tone and clarity of the American Note, although it is admitted that

Britain and the United States for the present appear officially to be as far apart on the naval question as at the time of the breakdown of the tripartite conference at Geneva.

It is understood that as some time may elapse before a definite approach can again be made to the subject of naval limitation the United States Government proposes vigorously to support the bill now pending before the Senate for the construction of 15 cruisers and one aeroplane-carrier.

On the fate of this measure, and of the efforts which may be made to bring the naval Powers closer together on the limitation issue, depends whether renewed efforts will be made to obtain the adoption of the ambitious programme formulated in America in December.