Evening star., 1922-05-12

time In history a real and practical
character. In such circumstance
there can be no question of an i'm
partial superarbiter. as. according {,
the sense of clause z, the role o,
superarbiter would evitabiy be fillet
by the other interested party. whici
would lead fatally to Intervention oi
foreigners in the internal affairs oi
Russia and would be tantamouIt Il
the abolition in practice of the in.
volatility recognized at the begin,
ming of clause of the regime Of
property existing in Russia.
Furthermore, the Russian delega
ton denies that clause Z has am
practical character. Its preseQce IL
tho memorandum can be explained
only as the result of a desire to sat.
isfy a certain resentment of class OF
party. and not by any means as 8
result of an adequate knowledge OF
the state of t.hings in Russia, to say
nothing of tho perpetual conflicts "a
which 1t would give rise between tn,
claimants and Che Russian govern.
ment and between the Russian gov.
ernment and the fdIeign powers.
Danger Of Poisoning.
Clause Z, far from creating be.
tween the soviet regime. and the cap.
italistic regime that mutual toll
erance which is the condition Of
tend to poison their relations. TIL.
foreigners who went into Russia,
not in consequence OF fSiendly
agreement with the Russian gov
ernment, in order to work under the
protection of Russian laws. but in
virtue of the decisions OF a mixeS
court of arbitration would soon fee!
a general hostility toward them.
The Russian government, on ~
part. in order to enable the former
owners Of nationalized property 70
apply their technical knowledge and
capital to the economic revival Of
Russia for their own advantage. has
right in every case whera their for
mer property Is to be let as con.
cession. whether under the form OF
a lease. a mixed company formed by
the state and the foreign capital. or
under any other form providing for
the participation OF foreigners.
The Russian delegation further oh
serves that interested states. i'm re-
serving all their solicitude for aTe-
stricted group OF foreign capitalists
and IN manifesting an inexplicabls
intransigeant doctrine. have sacri-
feed a great number Of foreign capi-
talists desiring to proft by the Ia
cIlitIes and guarantees onered tc
them by the Russian government in
order to return and work in Russia,
and they have sacrificed. as well,
the interests Of a multitude OF sma u
holders Of Russian bonds and small
foreign proprietors whose property
has been nationalized or sequestrated
and whom the Russian government
had intended to include among those
the justice and merit of whose claims
she recognized.
Tho Russian delegation cannot re-
frain from expressing surprise that
powers like France, which includes
the majority OF the small holders Of
Russian bonds. has insisted most upon
the restitution Of property. thus sub
ordinatins the interests of the smai y
holders of Russian bonds to those of
certain groups who demand this
restitution of property.
The sovereignty of the Russian
state becomes the plaything OF
chance: 1t can be defeated by the
decisions of a mixed court of arbi-
tration composed of four foreigners
and one Russian. which viii decide
in the last instance whether the In
terests Of foreigners are to be suojeCi
to restoration. restitution or indemniti-
cation