HOUSE OF LORDS

Hokitika Guardian, 8 November 1928, Page 5

HOUSE OF LORDS

LORD CUSHENDUN’S STATEMENT,

(British Official Wireless.)

(Received this day at 12.25. p.m.) RUGBY, November 7.

Lord Ciishendim, who is acting Foreign Secretary in the absence abroad of Sir Austen Chamberlain, made a statement in the House of Lords on the Anglo-French compromise. He welcomed the opportunity of saying something regarding the immense amount of misunderstanding and good deal of misrepresentation respecting this matter. He-denied there had been any secrecy whatever before any agreement was reached. At the earliest possible moment it was publicly announced the conversations were going on with a view to arriving at an agreement with the French. Sir A. Chamberlain’s statements in the Commons must have conveyed to any ordinary intelligent person the whole; nature ol the transaction, hut he would make this admission, that Sir A. Chamberlain did not give the actual terms ol the compromise.

“ 1 am quite free to admit that if it had been possible for him or anyone else at that time to foresee tho extraordinary wild, and in many eases, malicious rumours and innuendos that sprung up, I have very little doubt lie would have published the terms ol the compromise.” Unfortunately, very shortly afterwards, Sir A. Chamberlain’s health broke down and he was not responsible for anything that subsequently occurred.

Lord Cushendun, continuing, related how the mischief began with unauthenticated statements in certain French newspapers in August. They rclorred to a secret alliance and alleged that arrangements had been reached loi pooling the two navies. It was not unnatural that statements of that sort, caused misgiving in Germany, ltal\, and the United States. What, asked Lord Cushendun. was the precise charge against the Government? The Government were constantly being exhorted to proceed with disarmament, and no one was more anxious than the Government to encourage and push on with the policy of disarmament in every way that might be practicable. By what conceivable method could we compose our difference with the French, except by the method that had been adopted, by talking together, by consultation, by seeing whether by give and take it was possible to arrive at an arrangement; by what special method could we carry out what- we all agreed we wanted to get. namely, an international agreement. Critics of the Government exhorted them to base international relations upon the agreement, and in the same breath denounced them when they adopted the only method for arriving at an agreement.

One of the most pernicious and mischievous suggestions which had been made was that because we arrived at an agreement with one nation it must necessarily imply hostility to some other nation. Of course there was not the smallest shadow of foundation or evidence to support such innuendos. , ,ord Onsheinleii proceeded to ask whether the actual terms of the compromise were had in themselves. The criticism that we had allowed the French to have unlimited small submarines and unlimited small cruisers, and that by .so doing we were apparently conferring some immunity upon French which they had not at present, rested upon a complete iallnoy. He entirely denied that the efiect of the negotiations had been actually to set hack the cause of disarmament. They had done nothing of the sort. He had been asked what were our commitments. He could not state too emphatically that there were no committments. There never had been any.

On the question of military reservists. added Lord Cusliendun it would ho necessary before very long for the Government to give instructions to instructions had not yet been even their representatives at Geneva. 1 hose considered, hut we were under no obligations.