NAVAL CONFERENCE DEADLOCK

Hokitika Guardian, 24 March 1930, Page 5

NAVAL CONFERENCE DEADLOCK

CONFERENCE R K PORTS

[United Press Association—By Electric Teleg rap h. —Co py r igli t. j

(Received this day at 9.25 a.m.) LONDON, .March 23.

The Naval Conference was dormant during t!i-: week cud. Yelc,trams from Paris state M. Briand returns on Tuesday or Wednesday. No one appears to expect M. Tardieu.

I'iie “(Haerver” says it is honest o. him to return the Five Power agree meat ho./incd when he was here ;

week ago. Ho has not softened the French policy. What can be saved is tin. Throe Rower treaty which would have immense, perhaps, decisive, importance. Even an Anglo-American treaty itself would maintain the peace of the world.

FIXING THE R.ESPONS 1 BIIJTY PARIS, March 23

A correspondent says Ambassador Tyrrell and At. Briand discussed the Naval Conference position, the former explaining how, according to the British Government’s viewpoint, the absence of M. Tardieu and M. Briand affected the negotiations. M. Briand explained that he never intended to abandon the Conference, and would be ready to return when urgent local affairs liberate him. The actual date of his return must he determined by developments in London, but he saw no necessity of returning while the deadlock continued. Meanwhile M. Tardieu does not .go so far as to announce any intention of returning. French newspapers strongly protest against what they call the organised campaign of London newspapers in blaming France for the deadlock. They also suggest that the British Government instigated the campaign. “Le Temps” remarks: “Such oblique manoeuvres are especially disconcerting when undertaken bv people who are normally attached to the truth. In dealing with the International Conference, it says it is France alone who has made useful suggestions towards agreement. It is Italy who lias caused the deadlock.”