Evening star., 1924-12-17

The request of the British govern
ment to the League of Nations for
postponement of the discussion of
the security and disarmament pro-
tocol at the leagues next meeting 10
variously interpreted by American
editors. Some think the move is In.
tended to give the United states OPP
portunity to call disarmament con-
ference. Others believe 1t is a de-
nial of the conce ssions accorded to
Japan in order to keep peace with
the British dominions. which object
to the concession on the ground that
they might give opportunity for In
reference in purely domestic ques-
tions, including immigration.
AS the New York Evening Post
views it: "The directing members of
the league have evidently decided not
to throw overheard the chance of OBJ
tanning American cooperation with
out determining first what form that
cooperation will take. Spokesman
for France and for Japan indicate a
follow -the-leader attitude on the part
of these two nations by agreeing
with the Baldwin government that
haste should be made slowly. They
will hold the Geneva program in
allegiance until they find out what the
United States has to offer. This con-
stitutes a distinct reversal of the
league policy to take from America
the initiative and direction of arma-
ment reduction, but it need not pro-
hibit return to the Geneva protocol
IL that initiative. and direction does
not take a form that offers broader
and higher possibilities than the plan
that is to be shelved."
The New York Herald-Tribune be-
lieves that Britain would clearly
prefer a second armament limitation
conference in which the United States
would be a major factor, not mere
1ooker-on. 1t may be assumed that
Great Britain sees the value OF a sec
ond arms conference on neutral
ground which would be a real world
gathering rather than a league-man-
aged one The Presidents proposal
is not dead. Circumstances may
bring Europe to see that the Mac
Donald -Herriot conception of world
pacification was tinged too much with
discrimination and. exclusivenesSs
Britains indefinite postponement of
considering the protocol. the Sioux
City Journal declares, cannot be cor
rectly interpreted as sfgnifying any
thing but the prevalence in the new
British government of a powerfn III
pro- American view"
r y -
Although granting much may be
said in the note about the attitude
of the United States and President
Coolidge's desire to call another dis
armament conferepces, the Louisville
Courier-Journal thinks, sit is harmony
with Canada and Australia that the
British government is really consid-
ering. The Unionist government La
acting in accordance with its ideas
to further imperial unity" AS the
protocol was finally framed the
Springfield mass. }, Union suggests:
'It raised serious questions for some
of the BritishS dominions and Great
Britain cannot proceed with certainty
until there is complete understand
ing. with her dominions. Many other
questions are involved before the
question of american participation
can. be considered. This Is so be-
cause until Europe can settle her
own internationalism, any more ex-
tended internationalism must be pro-
visional at-best-"
In the opinion of the Providence
Journal, Great Brttain's action tends
to support the contention made BY
some observer when the protocol was