BRITISH ATTITUDE

Hokitika Guardian, 20 September 1932, Page 5

BRITISH ATTITUDE

TO GERMAN CLAIM PEACE TREATY MUST BE KEPT. f s’:.'* l ' ■ / ■ , • . (British Official Wireless.) : • RUGBY, ‘September 17. The views of the British Government on arising from, the exchange of notes in the matter of disarmament, are p/üblishqd. The statement. says: t- '• •; 1 : '“His Majesty’s Government think it unfortunate that a political control Versy of this magnitude ' should 'arise at « moment when it necessary • that attention and energy should not 'he diverted from the efforts so urgently needed to restore the prosperity of the world.- : ' ■' ■■■'' • 1 ' Granted that the question of equality of status would have arisen before the Disarmament Conference concluded, there is grave disadvantage in forcing it to (the if rant at dhis In view of Germany’s economic difficulties, the initiation of *aJn acute controversy in the pphtical field, at this moment, must Be aocounteid unwiV and in view of the concessions granted to Gerniatty by her ereditors, it must be accounted particularly untimely. ■ ’Rut' ns Germany’s .claim impose an- obstacle to the imootli harmofiioui working of. the Ctarferanwb. the Government consider they should-offer some suggestions as to how the claim might be deaCt with.

■ - First, ;it .is'.nece»sa,ry. to he clear as to what tlie, olaim involves, and the actual treaty position. His Majesty’s Government can give no countenance or encouragement to any. disregard of treaty obligations, and desire,to associate themselves, with thte opinion that it could not be maintained as the correct legal construction of the Treaty of Versailles, j?nd connected correspondence* /that, Germany is legally entitled abrogatioo. of, fcart Five of the Treaty, by any disarmament' convention to, il» concluded,, -or by «a failure to conclude lainy . convention a,t all.

Still less it is possible to deduce that the manner, in- which the general limn , tation of i armaments was to bo fulfilled %as to be. precisely the same as the manner in which Germany’s armaments wena limited by. Part Five. The correct position, under the Treaty of Versa riles,- i in/Part - Five, is still binding, and cam only; cease to be binding by. agreement. : riri: So much has been statad for ..the purpose .of clearing the:' ground, but the Government do not understand that the. case put forward by Germany is, a legalistic deduction from-the language of the-Treaty; It is rather an Appeal: for ■;adjvestment based on the fact that the 'limitation oh: Germany’s m&ment' WntaMfed f ? in> tile 1 Treaty, was intended to he a precursor cf ge«* eral limitation by others, His Majesty's <torernm<mt d» not deny this hat, and do not seek to minimise the force Of the contention. SO far as the Government of the .Unittgd Kingdom is concerned very, large of armaments have beien made since the Treaty was -signed. ' Nevertheless, the Government - are earnestly collaborating tot Genetva in, promoting a. measure of further disarmament.

The Government hopes there may result from Geneva,, in spite of the difficulties, a really valuable measure of disarmament,, in which each nation will hind itself to strict ' limitation, both in the kind and quantities of its weapons of war* Such a result can be attained only if due allowance is made, both for th* needs and for the feelings of iall the 64 States concerned/v The objects to be aimed at are, in the case of the more heavily armed powers the largest possible reduction, and'in the case of the lightly armed States, at any rlate no material in-, crease. It would indeed be a tragic paradox if the outcome of the first Disarmament Conference were an increase in armaments. The Governiment thefefdna conceive the object of the Conference to be to frame a disarmament convention, upon the principle that each State adopts for itself in agreement with others, the limitation which is self-imposed, and freely entered into ®s part of the mutual obligations of the signatories) to one another. This conception of the purpose of the disarmament conference gives the answer raised in the communication of the German# Government. , n V ■’

Questions status, as distinguished frjim quantitative questions, involve considerations of national pride and dignity, which deeply touch the heart of peoples, and keej> alive 'resentment, which would otherwise" give place to more kindly feeling. In the interests of general appsa'sement, such question should be disposed.qf by friendly negotiation, and adjustment,. not involving either disregard of the Treaty obligation®, or an increase in the sum of totalarmed forces, hut this desirable consummation cannot h© attained by peremptory challenge, or withdrawal from deliberations. It can only he , reached by patient discussion, between the States concerned.

WHAT IS GERMANY’S AIM? REPLY APPROVED BY PRESS. LONDON, September 19. ' iThf British nOws , '"T>ern, genernllv, approve of the British Government’s no + e. to Germany. “The Times” says: “Th. a present moment is one that has been extremely ill-chosen for the nosing o-f a nelitica) controversy of., such magnitude.