The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14th, 1924. THE RUSSIAN TREATIES.

Hokitika Guardian, 14 October 1924, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14th, 1924. THE RUSSIAN TREATIES.

It is clear that the Russian treaties "ill play a very important part in tho decision affecting the British elections. Home opinion on the subject "ill he of special interest at this 6tage. A commercial paper discussing the treaties goes on to say t"'o treaties with Soviet Russia, were signed hy the Prime Minister and Mr Ponsonhy the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs, explicit assurances having lieen given by the former in the House of Commons, that they do not commit Parliament, which will have full opportunities in the autumn to amend or reject them. There are two treaties, one a general treaty and the other a treaty of com mereo and navigation. They nro certainly remarkable instruments, and it may well be doubted whether Purlin-

incut will assent to them in anything like their present form. The first two chapters of the general treaty deal with existing treaties between Great, ltrilain and Russia, and the much disputed question i,f fisheries. The must important chapter is the third, dealing with claims and the conditional promise of a loan. 'I lie ccinmercial treaty, which is especially open

to criticism, confers most unusual privileges on the .Soviet Government and their representatives in this country. Recognition is made by the British .Government of the Soviet Government's monopoly of foreign trade, and they grant not only to the Russian Embassy, hut to the Soviet Tiade Delegation, diplomatic privileges, and to the premises of the Trade Delegation extra-territorial rights, the existing ollices the hitter being made to lona pail i.f the Embassy, which may also com) rise other ollices as may form the subject of future agreement. Auomer ilali.se declares that the Soviut Government “assumes responsibility" for tlie transactions of the .Soviet Trade .Representative, hut while agreeing that these transactions shall be suoject to the laws and courts oi Great Rritaiu and Northern Ireland it leaves a loophole to escape from tho implied obligation in that, “ill view <ii the responsibility for these transactions which is assured hv the Government of the Union, neither it nor Its representatives will he called upon to give security for complying with the orde’.s ol the court.” In effect, this means that British traders dealing with tlie Soviet Government would be unable to enforce any contracts at law. Under such conditions it is iic unten able that liritish traders would he disposed to enter into business transactions with the .soviet Government's leptcscnlatives. The commercial treaty also contains imel-lavomi (1-nation clauses, and to the great advantage of Soviet citizens provision is made for their enjoyment in ltrilain of the privileges of Rritish law, while, of course, “national treatment” in Russia, so far as the Liiilish subject is concerned, is attended by that uncertainty and risk to which the Soviet citizens have always been submit. Another idaiise, which seems solely in the interests of the Soviet Government, is that they reserve to themselevs the monopoly of the Russian coastal trade, throwing it open to British vessels only if that same privilege is enioyo.l by any other foreign country. In a supplementary declaration they also maintain their right over all ships of the former Rus sian navy, and over till ships of the Russian coniinorcial fleet, which have not been sold by them or with their consent. Generally, concludes the comment, the negotiations with the Russian representatives were welcomed in Britain, blit now that tho conditions of the proposed treaties have been made public there is no doubt that commercial opinion is strongly opposed to them as a whole.