The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 1930. BRITAIN'S OBLIGATIONS.

Hokitika Guardian, 17 April 1930, Page 4

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 1930. BRITAIN'S OBLIGATIONS.

An interesting discussion took place in the House of Commons bearing on the obligations that Britain lias assumed !>y signing the League of Nations Covenant. Air Locker-Lamp,son, lute Conservative I'nder-tSocretary for Foreign Affairs, in moving the adjournment of the House on account of “the imminence of an agreement between the cJoveriiment and foreign Powers,” was evidently referring to the discussions now in progress between France and Britain arising out of the Naval Conference. The ini-mcdiaife purpose of these discussions is to find a formula which will satisfy France’s demand for security, and the expedient employed is the interpretation of Article Id of the Covenant of the League. The Prime Minister, in his reply to Mr Lockcr-Lampson, referred at some length to Article Id, and to nmlerstaml the present situation, says the Auckland Star, it is necessary to make this clause of the Covenant clear. As

a matter of fact, the precise meaning to be attached to Arti-le 16 lias supplied the Council of the League with material for many prolonged and anx- | iuus debates. In its original form Article 16 provided that if any member of j the League, in defiance of its pledges, resorts to war, ‘‘it shall be considered ,to have committed an act of war against all members of the League,” and they are bound to punish it. This article binds them to break off all economic and financial relations with the erring member, and to prevent their “nationals” from having any personal, financial, or commercial intercourse with its subjects, More than this, Article 16 ordains that the Council of the League shall prescribe to the several governments concerned the resources—military, naval and aerial—to be contributed to the forces put at the disposal of the League to assert its will against any recalcitrant member. Within the iirst year of the League’s existence it was pointed out that the obligations thus imposed on small States might involve their destruction at the hands of a powerful and warlike member. The Second Assembly therefore revised Arti.le 16 by cutting out all reference to military action, left to the Council the right of deciding whether conditions warranting the enforcement of this clause have arisen, and authorised the Council to take into account “the special situation and needs of -the members of the League affected” All that Article 16 now empowers the Council to do is, in case of war. declared in defiance of the League “to recommend against- the. aggressor certain measures not exceeding bio kade” In fact, the Covenant now goes liittle further: than the Washington Four Power Convention which in case of war authorises the contracting parties to confer together and devise means for‘dealing with the situation. Those who four that Britain’s membership of League may entail upon, her special naval or military obligations doubtful of Article 16; and the fact that Britain and /ranee are. now discussing this , very article with a view to allaying Prance’s apprehensions has.,-aroused the suspicion that the article may he construed in such a way as to compel Britain to undertake further Iresponsibilities abroad on France’s behalf in the, hope of , inducing France to abate her demands for . a stronger navy. All ’this serves ‘to explain Mr Lbekcr-Lamp-son’s resolution, and Mr MacDonald’s eagerness to quieten public anxiety while evading any general discussion of the matter till the negotiations with France are concluded,