BRITISH PARLIAMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 4 December 1928, Page 5

BRITISH PARLIAMENT

IN THE COMMONS. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS. (United Press Association. —Ry Electric Telegraph.—Copyright ) (Received this day at 12.25. p.m.) LONDON. Dee. 3. In the Commons Sir Sassoon told a. quest .inner that, no more wooden aeroplanes were being 'brought into the R.A.F. service. Metal aircraft, strength for '.strength, were lighter than wood and less a Heeled by extremes of climate. I heir resilence ami froodom Irmu splintering reduced the risk lo the personnel in the event of a crash. Air Baldwin answering a question suggesting legislation forbidding tlio publication or tin.' amended Prayer Book, which was not sanctioned by Parliament, replied that it would be gross and unprecedented inlerlerencc t.o prohibit the publication of any literary work. The preface specifically pointed out that the act of publication in nowise implied that tin* book was authorised lor use by Lbe Established Church. GERMAN REPARATIONS QUESTION AIR BALDWIN’S ATTITUDE TO AIR BRITTEN'S ENQUIRY. (British Official Wireless.) LONDON, Dee. 3. ■ Jn the House of Commons, tbe Foreign Score!ary was asked ulictlici it was tin 1 opinion of the Government that j.he Gorman Government had earned uni, I In' terms of Article *l3l ol the Dome Treaty, and if not, whether the parti"iilars in which Germany bad not complied, could be stated ? Sir A. Chamberlain ropUed : “There are- one or two aspects of Ibis question ||,-it this particular enquiry relates to mi interpretation of the 1 renlv. and is a question of law. There is also a question of policy on I lie question of |;,w. Mis Majesty’s Government are advised there is no legal justification far the contention that Germany has complied with all the obligations imposed upon her by the 'Treaty, so as to (*iitill' 1 her. under Article 13] or otherwise. to demand the withdrawal of the forces at present occupying Rhineland, before the expiry of the period bud down in the Treaty. I lie chief obligation with which Germany lias not vet. complied is that of reparations. In the opinion ol the British Government l,he concession provided for in Article 4:31 could only take effect when Germany lias completely executed and discharged the whole of her reparation obligations. It. is not sufficient that .she should lie carrying out regularly her undertaking in the matter of current reparation payments. The phase, applicable to punctual performance of current obligations, was that used at (lie hoginning ol the Article, providing for quinquionnial reduction in the area under occupation, namely Article 42!). This phrase is: ‘lf conditions of the present Treaty are faithfully observed,’ as to oolicy which is equally importani. though decided by a different consideration. I repeat that His .Majesty’s Government would welcome l lie early evacuation of Rhineland hv French. British and Belgian forces, irre.s'iectivo ol the legal right, ol ex-Ai-lied Government to continue their occupation until the expiry ol the period fixed by tbe Treaty.”

Questions were asked regarding the i ominunieat ion addressed to .Mr Baldwin hv Mr I’.rit ten (Chairman of the Naval Affairs Oommittee of the American House of Representatives) recalling a desire expressed by Mr Baldwin in a speech on Nov. 13th. for more frequent personal discussion between American and British representatives, and proposing a meeting on Canadian soil, between American Naval Officers committed and a select, committee of urn British House of Commons, to discuss the subject of. Anglo-American equality in sea power, the Prime Min-it.-er said lie had replied to Mr Britten cordially reciprocating the spirit inspiring his suggestion and sharing Mr Britten’s earnest desire.for a complete understanding between the two countries. He had pointed out. however, ilia I in his speech of Nov. 13th. he was speaking, not of the legislature, hut of executives of Governments, and it was the absence of facilities for personal intercourse between .Ministers which he regretted. Except to remove this possible misunderstanding of her speech, ho felt it would not he consistent with file courtesy which he owed United States Government, to express any further opinion on the proposal about which lie understood they had not been consulted. He would therefore only repeal this appreciation ol Air Britten’s IT i end I v sentiments.