LIMITATION OF ARMAMENTS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 267, 1 April 1911, Page 5

LIMITATION OF ARMAMENTS

GERMANY'S REPLY. 'AX IMPRACTICABLE SCHEME. THE DIFFICULTIES IN THE WAY. By Cable—Press Association—Copyright. Received 31, 10.10 p.m. Berlin, March 31. Hcrr von Bethmann Hollweg, Imperial Chancellor, speaking in the Reichstag in reference to the Social Democratic proposal that he should initiate a general limitation of armaments, argued that Germany had studied the question, but was unable to find a suitable formula. He was not aware that others had been more successful. The time when European wars could be made by Cabinets Was past. Wars could only arise where antagonism had rooted itself in popular sentiment, which, he admitted, was very susceptible to an influence like the irresponsible agitations of the Press. If international effort created a counterpoise to such influences, he would rejoice, but a definite programme of disarmament was another question, and Was just as indefinite. Hazy proposals Were calculated to disturb instead of promote peace. Any scheme for the settling of the strength of nations in accordance will a sort of precedence list, and arithmetically according to areas and influence, was bound to fail. Herr Hollweg continued: "Somebody may lay a claim to rank of precedence already filled. England is convinced, and has repeatedly, declared, that, notwithstanding all her wishes for the limitation of armaments and international arbitration, her fleet must, under all circumstances, be a match for or be superior to any possible combination in the world. She is entitled to aim at that, but it is quite a different matter to make such a claim the basis of an agreement which, by peaceful assent, is to be accepted by other Powers. What if counter claims are raised, and the Powers are unsatisned with the respective roles assigned them? Similarly, an attempt to fix the strength of armies is impracticable. The greatest obstacle would be the question of control." He instanced Napoleon's attempt to limit Prussia's army to 42,000 men. Referring to Sir Edward Grey's suggestion, made in Parliament on March 14, he said the exchange of information regarding shipbuilding would prevent surprises. He remarked that Germany had been able to fall in with the idea all the sooner, inasmuch as her shipbuilding programme had always been laid open, and he had, therefore, declared his readi' ness to come to an agreement with England on the matter, hoping thereby that a calming of public opinion in England would follow. The unrestricted treaty between England and America, such as President Taft and Lord Grey had suggested, would simply put a seal on a state of things already existing de facto. "Let the situation change; let the antagonists touching vital interests arisethen I would like to sec an arbitration treaty that would not burn like tinder." He concluded by emphasising that Germany strategically held an exposed position, and had need to be in constant readiness, remembering that peaceableness depends upon strength.

The speech alluded to by Her Von Beth-1 mann Hollweg was made on March 14 by Sir Edward Grey, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in reply to a question by Mr. Balfour. He reiterated that "Mr. Asquith's policy was to maintain, in regard to European Powers, the twoPower standard. The United States must not be taken into account in the game way as a European nation. He opposed the motion for reduction because it ignored the expenditure of other Powers. Britain's foreign relations were not strained. Referring to Herr von Bethmann Hollweg's friendly expression in December, Sir Edward Grey said Britain desired cordial relations with Germany, "subject to the stipulation that when we make friendship we carry with us existing ones." Some people thought the growth of armaments would lead to war; but it was more likely to end by the revolt of the masses against taxation. Regarding the suggested agreement with Germany, it required careful handling, inasmuch as the Fleet Law must be executed. A better plan would be a frank exchange of information, to prevent surprises. Sir Edward Grey eulogised President Taft's speech on arbitration, and added: "An agreement to refer everything to arbitration would entail some risk, and, as President Taft remarked, some sacrifice of national pride. Britain would be delighted to receive such a sweeping proposal, but I should feel it so momentous and so far-reaching in its possible consequences as to require the signatures of both Governments and the deliberate and decided sanction of Parliament; and that, I believe, could be obtained."

DECLARATION OF LONDON. Berlin. March 30. The Foreign Office informed a Reichstag committee that Germany was disposed to ratify the Declaration of London, but would not assent to America's proposal to invest the international prize court with the function of a general permanent court of arbitration.