Evening star., 1923-09-21
WORLD ARMAMENT
STILL Up IN LEAGUE
Question First Broached at
Versailles Now Presents
Many Problems.
BY A. II. DECKER.
By Cable to Ihe Star and Chicago Daily New
Copvrieht IA13

BY Cable to Tha Star and Chicago Daily News.
Copyright. 1923.
GENEVA, September 19.-The ques-
ton Of world armaments, first broach-
ed at Versailles and continued in
: Geneva, Paris and London, is still
being discussed in the third commits
sion of the league of nations. The
question has grown like an avalanche,
until. 1t now comprises many prob
lens. which might be separated as
follows:
l. Whether to reduce or limit arma-
ments
2. How to harmonize reduction or
, Limitation with national security.
3. Should the guaranty in treaties
he general, covering all states, as
does the pact of Versailles. or should
the end be attained by a series of
local alliances or agreements?
4. Should armament treaties be a
development of articles VIII, X, XII and
XIV of the past
Brazil Members Position.
Senior Clark, Brazirs representative.
In an address took the position that
mutation of armaments was prefer
9oae Ito 10 an attempt at reducing them.
HOW can we discuss reduction of
armaments, he inquired. when
countries like those of South America
particularly Brazil, neglected the
army and navy program arranged
Defore the war because the countrias
live at peace. although their armae
mehts are not at the minimum pro-
Nlded by the pact for national Sc
curlty. Limitation would he prefer
aS aoie 70 reduction. / support Senior
ii-uWards as to the desirability of Civ
ence." iiAei
LORD Robert Cecil suggested using
tne phrase limitation or reduction"
e. ornaments. Denmark came out
Tor a reduction, protesting that Den
mark came into the league desiring.
q reduction of her armament burden
ne Danish delegate said he feared
% .he suggested treaty of mutual as
SoanSe o,Sns might split the league into
me Norwegian delegate. I.ance. said
ne was opposed to a treaty. since the
pact provided for a reduction of
1ioIi Us ana a system of arbitra-
Sueo' treaty was unnecessary. He
reared the treaty would mean a re-
turn TO the idea of Isl Wis pacem
para bellum." Ia
Lord CecIPs Views.
Lord Robert Cecil seems to support
We IDEA of general treaty,
As to the question whether apree-
ments 70 reduction or limitation of
armaments should be an Integral ma r.
II the mutual assistance treaty or
whether guaranty Of security should
oe given by the league of nations
ne SAID. "some states might consider
q guaranty necessary and want il
Included in general treaty"
NJ lie Brun, for France. said:
There should be a reduction TO q
minimum consistent with national
sarety The real character of the
treaty is indicated by articles VIII
ana \. Giving of aid to an attacked
state should be conditioned upon its
having reduced armaments as per the
agreement"
Both French and Hungarian dele
gates expressed the view that the
states could not engage themselves
as regards all other states, and that
article XIV of the pact was suf
hctent The Canadian proposal for
amendment of article Y was men
TONED but not discussed
Impression Gained From Definite
From the debate, one gathers the
impression that France, italy. Hun
gary, and Poland oppose a treaty NJ
mutual assistance in general form. as
suggested to be attached to the re.
auction or limitation convention
while Great Britain is pushing Tie
loea OF a general treaty The French