NAVAL CONFERENCE

Hokitika Guardian, 22 January 1930, Page 5

NAVAL CONFERENCE

v AN unforgettable scene

[United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright. J

{Received this dav at LI a.in., LONDON, Jan. 21. No passage in the King's wonderfully impressive' speech at the opening of, the Conference stood oiit so clearly as a clarion call, as the appeal for an edifice of peace. Inspiring, indeed was the fact that this was h is .Majesty’s first public utterance since his

illness. Everybody was delighted to see him looking so well and hear his ringing vigorous, voice as he led up to tiie final (hope that the nations would be successful in bringing world relief from, the burden of armaments. Every phase carried a ring of deep sincerity, earnestness and dignity. He began and ended in the most intense hush, and with telling effect. ■London contrived to produce a blanket for the occasion, blit nolxidy dared to suggest it was potent of the impenetrability for the Conference. It’s only ill-effect was to retard the King’s progress from Buckingham Palace and delay the opening for a few minutes.

Journalists had been seated since 10.45 enjoying the un-ending procession of the arrival of diplomats, experts and parliamentarians till the whole place was a buzz of polyglott conversation.

The King’s approach produced an unforgettable episode. ' The whole building was humming with conversation. There was no signal to, herald His Majesty’s entrance, but everyone seemed simultaneously to sense the psychological moment and a hush came us magic, and it seemed as though the gallery had been suddenly plunged into a huge vacuum.

His Majesty walked on the heavily carpeted passage way to the' raised daisj and'bowed to delegates on both sides, before taking his position in front of the golden microphone. It was only a five minutes’ speech after which the King, seated on a golden throne, followed with interest the French' interpretation, y Mr MacDonald followed with a sixteen minute written speech.

; 'o,ther delegates spoke and the French interpretation followed each, all without applause. < ■ - The only interruption was the constant going and coming of journalists, rushing, messages to every corner of the globe 1 -..Mr Fenton and Mr Wilford played tlieir roles excellently. They, like all others, had on microphones.

MR MACDONALD ELECTED CHAIRMAN.

A • : LONDON, Jan. 21. - After the King had completed his speech, Mr MacDonald, who was elected Chairman of the Conference said: “It is peculiarly appropriate this should be the occasion of His Majesty’s first public speech since his illness, and I venture to offer him in your name pur heartiest thanks and congrntulationsi” Continuing, he said:,“Every country • feels the burden of arms, and dreads their competitive development, doubts the value of security they give, and wants to; escape their influence and . power. Difficulties, in a way, come mainly from one source, a lack of con- . iidence. It is feared some state may refuse to carry out its obligations, and the' machinery of arbitration may break down somewhere, or somehow a deadlock may arise from which the only method of escape is to fight. This habit of mind nurture for many gen- , erations controls our thinking action and presents great militarism as a means of national security. The whole ' world expects we shall deliberate and negotiate on tfte assumption that we mean to respect our signatures to the Peace, Treaty and prays that we relieve it from its burdens and establish it more securely in the ways of peace. It ... begs us to lift the problem from merely the scrutiny of machinery to a broader field of creative statesman. It depends on agreements to stop the recent naval competition after reviewing attempts to further national security and peace since the war.” ■ Mr MacDonald added: “I take it, practical securities must determine the amount of military preparation, the excess of which is a wasteful use 1 of national resources and weakens the political security. No nation is free except by international agreement, to pursue a policy of disarmament, be- \. yond a right to defend. The limits of such an agreement should be reviewed at frequent intervals in order that political movements towards security may be used progressively to reduce 'arms. I dare to affirm .that in the naval programmes of the loding powers there is a margin between real security and the needs of the actual projected, strength, which the world expects the Cbnference, to eliminate. Meanwhile the ■yvealth of Britain is on the sea and our Navy is not a mere super fluency to ns. Britain can make a contribution to peace wTiicli will be one of deeds, as well as words. We invite the Naval Powers to formulate an agreement for presentation to the Disarmament Commission.” Mr Fenton (Australia) said: “We bold no sacrifice too "great, which is directed at International peace.” Mr W'akatsuki said: “Japanese unani- • mously desire a peace that should be lastingly established. Japan is prepared, in conjunction with other Pow- ■ ers, to agree not merely to a limitation but to an actual reduction in strength. .. Her only concern is the keeping of national security undisturbed by and ■the retaining of a force adequate for |f defence.”

Signor Grandi said: “The Italian delegation will be second to none in its efforts to secure the ends in view, signor Mussolini has laid down a vast programme of work, requiring a long period of peace. The Fascist Government is always ready to accept proposals for disarmament.” Mr Stirnson (America) said: “It is important to emphasise that we do not read this effort towards disarmament as final. Naval limitation is a continuous process, and disarmament is tiie goal that will be reached by successive steps and frequent rejoicing, zeal in the general cause is united. We are ready to stay here until we can give a world agreement, carrying us on happily till the times when we meet again to reconsider the situation.” Mr Ralston said: “Canada looked not wholly towards armaments for security, but towards the machinery which forestalled the necessity for force by disposing of questions on a basis of discussion.” M. Taixlieu (France). Mr Chatterjec (India) and Mr Smiddv (Irish Free State) expressed their countries goodwill. Mr T. M. Wilford (New Zealand) said: “Though realising the trade routes and ships carrying our produce are the veins and arteries of the Emoire, and that our very existence may depend on the protection we can ourselves supply New Zealand understands a compromise means concessions, and is ready to stand shoulder to shoulder with those who seek to lay the foundations of peace, and who believe an appeal to reason should come before, and not after, the catastrophe.” The order of speeches was: MacDonald, Stirnson, Fenton, Ralston, Tarclieu, Chatterjec, Smiddy, Grandi, Wakatsski, Wilford, Tewater.