LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Hokitika Guardian, 28 September 1922, Page 3

LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CAT)LII ASSOCIATION AT GENEVA CONFERENCE. Received this dav at 12.25 p.ui.) GENEVA, Sept. 2, Sir .J. Cook said he did not want to throw cold water on the efforts ol the Disarmament Committee. Nbverthcloss he was not satisfied. It seemed to he assumed that material disarmament was dependent on moral disarmament. That policy would not help the financial problem of exchanges etcetera. If no better progress were possible than the disarmaments report proposed, disarmament was Runway, as it would take a decade before anything substantial "as dene. Under the present proposals, though progress would lie slow, lie hoped it would be correspondingly sure. He praised Lord Cecil’s work, but vigor-

ous prompt action was needed. Disarmament was the very crux ol the League's existence. If they failed in this, they would fail in the principles constituting the very reason lor its existence, lie uidmitted tlv> out hunk was not clear, but they must go forward with greater energy and determination. He was disappointed by the Italian and French spankers, who seemed disposed to make the economic situation the supreme question of the moment. He was afraid it was generally not recognised that the Allies had handicapped themselves against their erstwhile enemies by disarming the latter, who thereby were

unduly favoured in the economic struggle. If the Allies continued to carry the burden of armaments thoy would handicap themselves. The disarming of Germany relieved her ol that burden, while we still tarried ours, thereby giving Germany tremendous economic advantages. Before the war. Germany had an average of a million conscripted men, which were now released for industry. The taxpayers were correspondingly relieved. By the time u.■ voluntarily disarmed under these proposals. Germany would have already achieved enormous progress industrially and it would he difficult for ns lo overtake it. Half our economic competitors were relieved of armament burdens. While we staggered under them, the former must achieve a leading industrial position. < herofere the greater obligation was upon us to urgently address ourselves to this task. v

The French delegate, M. Jouveiml, urged that the large stales should safeguard the smaller. The hirg' states really needed relief. Some of the largest states were more heavily burdened proportionately than the small. He suggested thee should not wait for the fulfilment of the whole s-bcnie of disarmament, hut should trv experiments while eanving out international enquiries for tli" purpose of evolving a larger scheme. I Air Fisher nninted on* that Britain, had taken risks in disarmin'', and tie-. Overseas dominions were following the example. The Australian budget w-i • this year reducing the defence vole l»-Iwenty-five per cent on tbo toMil and: doing that without awaiting the larger schemes. Australia was there- : fore taking some risks in the interest ' "I the general cause of disarmament. , Mould anybody else take l similar risks. ' j If some of tlie European slates would : | ilo so, nent would begin to j progress iin in fdiaV'ly. lie commend- i <'d Britain ami Australia’s example to j the other nations. After four years j ol war tlie* world had the tragic spectai le ot nations spending twenty pw rent of their revenues on preparations to destroy each other. He counselled i the nations to abandon their war 1 j suite, otherwise the ornamental bur- , | den would mean a slow but sure am! j steady suicide. ' Applause'. ;