Evening star., 1922-03-05
Armaments or Understanding

| PARIS.-Jean Hennessy. a member
i of the French chamber of deputies
writes this in LOeuvre:
Many Frenchmen are of the opin-
ion today that it is high time to unite
| the European peoples by pacific ties
| Thus the members of the Proudhon
Society declare that the solution OF
the European crisis demands the con-
stitution of a European society OF
| nations as a necessary condition for
the development of the interconti-
mental league of nations. Thus also
the enlightened editors of Europe
Nouvelle try to show that European
pact is necessary; and it is thus also
that the commission of foreign af-
fairs of the Republican League, OF
| which 1 am the president, is of the
cratic party should influence France
to contribute with all her might to-
ward pacific organization OF
Europe.
'It depends on five diplomatic centers:
Moscow. Berlin. London, Rome and
Paris If they remain rivals. it is for
Europe an era of ornaments. of ter
rible economic struggles, of always
possible wars: if they agree. peace is
certain. order is re-established. the
necessity for excessive arnaments
no longer exists: in a word, Europe
is safe.
But the question arises" continues
the writer. whether, in order to
found this new society of which Eng
land. and not Great Britain. is called
to take part, it is necessary to sign
previously treaty between France
and England.
rs it really necessary to sign an
agreement when in article X of the
pact of the league of nations it says
that members of the society agree to
maintain the territorial integrity of
all the members of the league against
all outside agression?
"As England and France both be-
long to the league of nations an
Anglo French treaty is not at all the
same thing as the Anglo-American.
French treaty which was submitted
to the chamber after the Versailles
belong to the league. England and
France have no interest in awaken
ing the league of nations. Is not
that the surest way of doing so by
discrediting an article which they
have both signed. and which binds
Ought not England and France to con-
slider themselves sufficiently bound by
this signature?
"If the Anglo-French agreement
has no other object than to seek ways
and means necessary for applying
article X in case of need. it is all right
but then 1t concerns chiefly the naval
and military STATS of the two states
II, on the other hand. the terms OF
the agreement are vague and only
paraphrase article X. of what use
is it? What does 1t add to the agree
ment already signed?
II don't believe in q total alliance
between France and England" con-
tinues M. Hennessy. "The latter is at
the head of a large federation. the
territories Of which are scattered all
over the world. the former is a sim
gle state. with administered colonies
England would always keep the
liberty of judging special cases. H.
for instance, we were drawn into al
action in Germany to prevent an
army being formed or obtain pay
ments, England would reserve the
right Of questioning our action. If
the English government were to give
up this right today, the English peo-
pie would maintain 1t. for expedl-
tions abroad, outside of the island.
depend on the will of the people. :.
"Would 1t not be much better, in