REPARATIONS.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 October 1920, Page 5

REPARATIONS.

IS GERMANY SINCERE? ! PRANCE HINTS EVASIONS. Pj T»l»it»Sb.'-PrMS Aasn-iCoijyils'nt. Paris, Oct. 8, The Echo de Paris states that the Gov eminent received on Wednesday a most important Note from tho British Cabinet in reference to reparations. Lord Curzon (Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs) recalls the decision at the Spa conference to hold a meeting at Geneva on August 8, despite which France rejected Britain's proposal for an open financial discussion on September 24. Lord Curzjn insists on the convocation of a conference of technical experts in accqrdancs with the determination at Spa, and suggests an international congress subsequently in order to translate into a definite convention the proposals arising from the conference of experts.—Aus.N.Z. Cable Assn.

REASON FOR CHANGE. GERMANY AND MODIFICATIONS. Received Oct. 9, 5.5 p.m. London, Oct. 6. The Daily Chronicle says it was a sharp surprise for the British Government to find that M. Milleran'd had changed his views since the Spa Conference. He wished a special meeting of the Reparations Commission to be held in Paris, instead of a joint commission of the Allies and Germans sitting at Geneva. Though Belgium supported France's view, America strongly backs up the British view. Britain might consider a previous meeting of the Reparations Commission, but only as a preliminary to the Geneva Conference. The Paris correspondent of the Morning Post says the French view is that the Germans hope to gain concessions at Geneva by inducing the Allies' leadera to consent to modifications of the Peace Treaty, whereas the Reparations Commission, being bound by the Treaty, Is not empowered to grant concessions. It is understood the French reply to Lord Curzon (British Foreign Secretary) will insist ■ upon the meeting of the Reparations Commission, but a compromise may be arranged when M. Delacroix meets Mr. Lloyd George shortly. —Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.

ALLIES AT VARIANCE. THE DIFFERENCES EXPLAINED. Received Oct. 10, 5.5 p.m. London, Oct. &. The difference between Britain and France regarding the Geneva Conference is that Britain favors the AllieS Council discussing with the German delegates the indemnity proposals, but France is unwilling to meet the Gennan delegates on equality. France also desires to limit the proceedings at Geneva to a meeting of financial experts from the Allied Reparation Commission to draw up the preliminary plans regarding the indemnity for submission to the respective Allied Governments. The British method would accelerate a settlement of the indemnity problem.—Aus.N.Z. Cable Assn.