Why France is Right.

Hokitika Guardian, 17 March 1923, Page 4

Why France is Right.

BY IIMITLKY V,THIERS. ('l'he Leading Writer on Finance.) it was very natural that the action of the French on the Ruhr should have been regarded as disastrous hv those vdio took a short-distance view concerning its possible results and thought that it would be bad for trade. 'l'he industrial producer and merchant. who want to get hack the European market, might well be excused if they thought that- all this apse! was likdy to put hack the day of recovery and that its early achievement was the only tiling to be considered.

This view is very reasonable, but it does not follow that it is right. The moratorium of four years involved by the British plan produced at the recent Premiers' Conference might very easily have become merely a period of long-drawn-out uncertainty and doubt, in the course of which all the old features that have put hack the day of recovery might have been present in undiniinislied force. We might have had further protests from Germany that, the sums imposed upon her by the plan were impossible, a further chorus to the same effect from German sympathisers in England, and a consequent further depreciation in the mark, with more profits for Ge - nian industrialists, more chaos in German finances, and more impossibility in getting near to a settlement.. Tn this case a new period of bewilderment and friction would have found the world, at the end of four years. 5....1 faced by the same question, which would loolc more than ever insoluble. This being so. i-von on the short chorus of objurgation against Fiance that was produc'd hv her determination to take immediate action in order to bring really effective pressure upon Germany. But much more amazing and difficult j to defend is the vituperation that has ■ been poured upon our French neigliI hours by people who are strongly inj r-lined to pacifist views and now. in their eagerness to patch up any sort : of settlement with Germany, propose that, this country should take a strong j militarist line against France. In Tlie Times of last Saturday. Mr ■ 0. T. Falk, well known as a tbought- ; fill authority on economic questions, ’ended a letter l.v expressing the conclusion tiro ‘-it is already time to , abandon benevolent neutrality with a view to protecting Europe. Germanv. ! and ourselves against France, who is now the enemy.” Apparently we arc not only to rattle our sabres, but also to proceed to melylisation in order to licit) Europe. Germany and o’-'-clv-- -nil liicidcnla’lv t defeat the ->:d; >f justice, w'-h-’i demand—as pacifists above all must recognise—that those who hrca'c ' ' - peace of the world should pay the full penalty. Surely it is much to be deplored that this revival of war spirit should insl.-o Rsclf shown in such unexpected quarters? Tf we apply a little common sense

o the problem now at. issue we find hat both the French and Germans are leliaving in a quite sensible and human na liner. With an indemnity" imposed up n them by victorious enemies, the Germans have naturally done eveiything they could to allow their finances to drift into a chaotic condition, so that they might he aide to put a good case before the world for being able to pay as little as possible. From, the report of the very sympathetic foreign experts, including Mi Keynes, who were consulted by the German Government last Novemlier on ~.e question of stabilising the mark, it appeared that the German Government lias been charging to “revenue” in other words, to the printing press capital expenditure which ought to have been paid for out of loans raised from investors anil had not done all that it could either in reducing expenditure or in collecting taxation. AH this was most natural, and what any sensible people would do in the circumstances. But it also most naturally hud the effect of wearing out French patience. The French thought, and with a good ileal of reason, that the terms proposed in the British plan of settlement were very generous to Germany and not very generous to France. Franco wants money out of Germany end thinks that if she can hit the Gorman indi'slrial'sts ill their pockets there is much more chance of g tthig same luniev than by making agreements with the LJenna n Government and leaving the German industrialists to render them futile. Slip may prove to he right, and so long as there is this possibility it is surely heiioi to refrain from abusing an AI l.v whom mu in! the United States left ill .the lur.-li at the end of the war l.v refusing : ■ a l e the promised Fact.