REPARATIONS.

Hokitika Guardian, 5 January 1923, Page 2

REPARATIONS.

AUSTRALIAN AND N./.. CABLE ASSOCIATION. FRENCH CHIT ICISAI. PARIS, Jail. 3. Jt is declared in official circles that France cannot accept less than £1.300000.000. which is still required lor tlu; devastated regions. It is contended that the twansfei to Britain of bonds received in respect to the Belgian debt, would give Britain the right of priority on the German payment which follows payment under Belgium’s priority rights. French official opinion doubts Air ( Bonar Law’s authorship of the syheme ! declaring the proposal distinctly would I upset the Versailles Treaty by suppressing the Reparations Commission. One high authority describes the proproposals ns “a formidable disillusionment.” Another authority says: Even .<>l Ramsay MacDonald could produce * better plan!” One serious view is that the proposa s indicate a desire to phi.v the game of Germany. p is reported that AT. Theuins and M Jaspar support M. Poincare’s demand that the French plan shall he the basis of the discussions. It is also reported that Al. l’oineare insists the continuation of the conference be conditional on acceptance of his demand. FRANCE’S VIRAY. PAR lE. January 2. The French have at the eonfovem e presented a statement iliat covers 10 pages of foolscap. Generally follows “T.e Petit Parisicu's” summary already published. The statement opens with the declaration of France's wish to work ill the closest accord with all Use Allies. France insists that Germany has given proof, again and again, of her refusal to honour her obligations. The French Government can neither in equity nor fad pay either capital or interest on the i liter-All iocl debts unless she is at least covered by German payments for ilie devastated regions. The French Government considers that foreign loans to Germany should lie facilitated l,_v the 'Allies in every possible way. Such loans will very shortly he possible, in view of the fact that Germany possesses real securities. Steps must he taken to prevent the escape of German capital abroad, and the hoarding of foreign securities by Germany. France demands that the Committee of Gnarantees shall cany out its programme, and lh.it. in the event of die Allies not ratifying the same, or of Germany defaulting, the sanctions should immediately operate. France is of tile opinion that Germany "ill he capable, during 1923. of making, in conjunction with her leading merchants, a sufficient effort to honour the payments. France refuses to consider, the granting ot a moratorium for liny pel iod beyond two years. This would only be granted if Gei'm*vi\ made an effort, to issue loans and balance her budget, and redeem her debt. The occupation must cover the periods of the moratorium and of the subsequent payments.in cash and kind. The French Government is of opinion that, it is desirable to return to the economic procedure laid down at the London Conference in March 1921 : but, in view of objections made. Franco would he prepared to raise customs dues oil the eastern frontiers, and thus avoid customs barriers east of the occupied territory and the Ruhr. France estimated the yield from ibis source at two hundred million gold marks per year. France also suggests a tax of thirty per cent should be levied from the owners of mines, which would yield fou'r hundred million gold marks per annum. As regards the Sanctions. France suggests that in the event of Germany not carrying out the programme. there should first he military occupation of Essen. Bochum, and the Ruhr Valley. Secondly, there should he the establishment of a customs harrier east of l e occupied area. All this would he without prejudice to France's right to postpone the evacuation of the territory in the event of the Treaty or Versailles being infringed. FRENCH PRESS VIEWS. PARIS, January 3. Following on file Obi not meeting. Af. Poincare informed the Press that not only were the British propi sals unsatisfactory to France, hut were equally unfair to the Belgians and Italians. He was sure flow Italy would he with France in objecting to their gold deposits with the Bank of England (as security for Allied debts) being applied to the reduction of those debts. He would not admit a discussion at the conference on the basis of the British prop-sals, and would not run the risk of the French plan being dc-t oyod by discussion in detail There were n .\v only two alternatives for the Conference, firstly, to vote on the French proposals. which were a minimum. or. secondly, to declare a disagreement. The French Press generally is averse to All- Bonar Law’s plan, but- while emphasising the point that the plan caused a disagreeable surprise and great disillusionment, and expressing a four that British and French viewpoints are j irreconcilable, it adopts a reserved tom* i “L'Eelio de Paris" predicts that the | Italians and Belgians "ill support AL i Poincare's demand that the French j scheme he the basK of the discussion. I if the Conference is to continue. ! ■‘Le Petit Journal” hopes that no t effort will he snared to arrive at an j agreement and consolidating of peace ! lending to the rapproaclinient between ! Europe and America. i "T.s Journal” says that the British l proposals caused consternation. Ap-: ' arently, England continues to believe j that Germany having returned to pros- j parity, will provide markets for her j goods. This is a flagrant error. Air ‘ Bonar Law’s policy is similar to Air \ Lloyd George’s, and can only lend Eng- ‘ land into disaster. “Le Journal” adds: : “If Germany’s foreign securities abroad are not immediately recalled for the , purpose of seizure, they will constitute I the most marvellous ipstrupiest she ' could find for the establishment of th a t ; economic superiority of ■wlijo'i r*Tl dorVTr'iMc fUrr-p. tVi n

-‘Le Matin” says: \ disagreement seems inevitable. “Le Petit Parisian” regrets that the r English plan was tabled. Majority opinion is that M. Poin- * care’s propositions provide a starting point for a discussion. Perhaps the j Belgians who previously intervened in j the jeopardised conferences, will offer I mediation. CONFER FXCK ADJOURNS. PARIS, Jan. 3. The Conference adjourned without any decision. Mr Bonar Law is sending a reply to France to-morrow. ANGLO-FRENCH DISAGREE. LONDON, Jan. 3. ' j The “Daily Chronicle’s” Paris cor- | respondent says:-—"So far as any usoi ful purpose is concerned, the Paris j Conference may ho regarded as dead. The French rejection of the British scheme was immediate and brutal. X j Having hitherto regarded Mr Llovd George as the cause of all the trouble j the French press is now blaming Sir ■ i K Bradbury •British member of Repatriations Commission), and laird Dahernon (British Ambassador at Berlin). One newspaper in Paris describes the British scheme as “made in America.” France’s fundamental objection to the course is that 'the plan destroys y tli whole pagoda oi the sanctions. Ihe correspondent asserts that any fuither occupation is intended to divide the Rhineland and Ruhr from the west of Germany, so permanently dividing and weakening her. FRENCH CHAGRIN. PARIS. Jan. 3. •■be Temps” to-night said:—“The British Reparations policy has survived the change of the Ministry. When Britain submits a project which brings us, within four years, taee to face with a ruined France and a re-established Germany, how can we believe in British diplomacy S' The bonds which existed in war time have vanished! The Continental Allies can only count on their own strength to safeguard their security and independence!. Le them think of t he future ! ” LONDON, Jan. 3. The “ Daily Express’s ” Paris correspondent says:— France regards as the only ray of hope that the effects of a breakdown of the Paris Conference on the Lausanne Conference would he so grave as to impel both France and Britain to avoid ii. PARIS, Jan. 3. It is learned that M. Theuiiis has declined to act as a conciliator, feeling i that the great divergence oT the French ~>sand English plans makes an open rupture almost inevitable. A PRESS VIEW. PARIS, Jan. 4. The newspaper “ Eclair.” discussing the reparations' discussion, criticises England’s narrow egotism, and adds. • • There is •> ditch bet« ecu England and France It is nut France which will *TOSS it-