THE BURDEN OF ARMS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1057, 21 February 1911, Page 5

THE BURDEN OF ARMS.

AUSTRIA SEEKS REDUCTION, I)j- Tclccraph-Prcss Asßoclntlnn-Corvrlflt-(Rec. February 20, 11.25 p.m.) Vienna, February 20. Tho Austrian Delegation has agreed to tho Au'stro-Hungarian army and navy estimates, but has decided to present a resolution to tho Government asking it to mako serious efforts on behalf of general disarmament, and tho development of tho Hague Arbitration principle. A Socialist motion in favour of negotiating with Italy for tho reduction of armaments was rejected. GERMAN CHANCELLOR'S VIEWS.' In the' German Reichstag a few weeks ago tho Imperial Chancellor made referi euce to tho question of limitation of , armaments, proposals as to which have , repeatedly been mado by the British Government to the Kaiser's Ministers. Tho Chancellor said:— "As regards our relations with England and alleged negotiations with that couutry on tho subject of an understanding with a view to limiting naval armaments, I wish, first of all. to point.out that it is, I dnro say, well known that the British Government have repeatedly advanced tho idea that un arrangement stipulating tho strength of tho navies of the several Powers would essentially contribute towards consolidating international relations. England, as you [ know, has already expressed that idea nt : Tho Iloguo Conference. Since then Engj land has repeatedly referred again to the idea without', however, making propositions which could hnvo been either posi- '■ lively accepted or rejected. We likcl wiso fall in with tho.de'siro cherished by i England of avoiding rivalry in regard to I armaments. But in the • occasional and , informnl pourparlers, conducted in a ' friendly spirit, we have always laid emphasis on tho fundamental idea that an opon and confident exchange of -views, followed by an understanding on the mutual economical and political interests of the two countries, would bo tho best means of removing any distrust arising from; tho comparative strength of their r armies and navies. Tho very continuance, of such nn exehnngo of.views gives evidence of the friendly, intentions prevailing on either side. It may gradually remove tho distrust which has mado itself felt not between-' tho Governments, hut, unhappily, often'in publio opinion." '. Dr. Wiemer '(Radical Peoples party) Said that the Army and Niivy must rertainly be kept up to tho standard, but this ought to-bo possiblo without'an increase iii tho peace strength. Those who " wanted nn understanding with Great s Britain would do well not to say. too much about it. Limitation of nrmn- \ menli in agreement, with other States would not bo'excluded by the self-evident condition that every State must determine tho measure of its own armaments. Baron von Gamp (Imnenal par/y) n=kcd: "Why do wo miestion the need for •' nnr armaments? Just go to France. 0 Presumably the J.nbour uartv has the " deciding voico in England. If it should : " refnso the naval demand, then we may 0 perhaps como to an understanding. Ger- ;' many has shown in forlv years of- ne.ico '■ that she wank neaco. If (irpat Britai" 0 to-dav takes n different view of the naval !1 miction, we owe tip* chiefly to the in--0 illative of Admiral Ti''"itz. Secretory of State for Hie >V-v. The probability of it coming to a fight is ns nood a* remov--0 etf owi"c to the respect inspired by our s fleet. Likewise. i> good army is nn un- " condition-1 necessity for tho maintenance f of peace."