Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 14 May 1932, Page 4

Jx the course of comment on the matters to .be dealt with at Lausanne Conference, it was stated recently that alii 'section of German opinion are united in the belief that the time, has arrived l when compromises must he refused and reparation payments ended. It is sometimes argued, principally .in France, that Germany’s distress is her own fault, and it would be easy to show that she had been extravagant in economics and, at times, provocative in politics. But in addition to what has been suffered by defeat in the war and l what followed, there lias always beeu hanging over her a hopeless reparations debt, though there were, not even the resources sufficient for financing her own industries. Recently, M. Herriot in a speech in the Chamber of Deputies, referred to the insignificant part that reparations actually represent in the German budgeting expenditure, and while that ia doubtless true, the burden of reparations was 'superimposed on an already crushing load, forcing Germany to a too sudden, and an unnatural rationalisation of industry in an effort to find fund's. This was ■ made possible only by borrowing on a scale that led to potential bankruptcy. It is doubtful if the Lausanne Conference enn arrive at finality, for that can come only by mutual consent, and such consent seenw improbable owing to the unbending attitude of France. The opinion is growing that a solution of the problem will be, found only in announcements of unilateral decisions. The assumption of German payments was the assumption on which the payment of British, French, and other countries’ debts to the United States was liaised, and with the collapse of that assumption those countries would he involved in hopeless promises. The theory of reparation* has been .responsible for umis peak-able eonicsion. Creditor nations may wish to mend the reparations payment plan, hut Germany may "cut the Gordian knot by deciding to end it.