Evening star., 1927-05-15

ments under the Dawes plan stands,
the British will shortly get more from
Germany and their allied debtors than
the Mellon Baldwin agreement Calls
for.
Statement Evoked Anger.
This was the statement which
evoked British anger. For 1t turned
the whole Balfour note position, In
that the British had asserted that
they would only collect enough to pay
the United States. But Mr.. Mellon
pointed out that in the future they
would under existing agreements,
get more and the continental debtors
naturally seized upon the point and
INDUCED in comment on British policy
only less acrimonious than that APP
piled to the operations Of Uncle
Shylock."
Churchill is. of course, correct In
his note in pointing out that so far
Britain has paid us much more than
she has collected from Germany and
her allies. Mr.. Mellon did not deny
this. but much comment in Britain
neglected the American text and as
sumed this innuendo. Churchill Is
equally right In asserting that 1t Will
take much time before the surplus of
future years will balance the past
deficits. And he is within his rights
in asserting that, If that point is
reached, British demands upon con-
tinental debtors will be reduced.
Points to Real Gravamen.
But the real gravamen of the pres.
ent controversy lies in the fact that
every one in Europe accepts 1t as
automatic that the Dawes plan pay
| ments will never reach the minimum
, provided. and that within two years
at the outside the whole schedule will
have to be revised downward. Thus
| in practice the British are not likely
to see arrive the happy time which
Mr.. Mellon forecasts.
| 1t must be recalled that even the
| Dawes plan did not provide any time
| limit. 1t adjusted a system of pay
| ments which were to reach a maxi
| mum in five yearS-that is, two years
hence. After that there was no state
ment of the number of years during
which they were to continue.
| The Germans did not and do not
want a time limit fixed because they
| believe that were ii fixed now it
would be for a very long period and
at high rate. Like all other Euro
peans, the Germans expect that the
whole question of the Dawes pay
ments will be brought before q new
conference before very long. They
| believe, as do most competent au-
thorities, that ut such conference it
will be recognized that the maximum
| Dawes plan payments of some $780,.
| 900, 900 annually are too great bur-
den for Germany to bear. Thus they
expect reduction in the amount and
then a fixa.tion of the period of pay.
ment.
Dislike American Position.
Nothing is less satisfactory to the
British and to the Europeans gener-
ally than the apparent American as
sumption that the debt question is
settled, and that when the French
ratify the Mellon Berenger. agree
nent a system will be set up to con.
tinue for two generations.
All the difference between the Eu-.
ropean and American conceptions is
disclosed in the American and British
settlements with France. The Brit
ish. convinced that payments will not
continue long, have insisted upon rel
atively large payments at once. $71,-
600, 900 from the French and $4,000
900 from the Italians. We, on our
side, believing that the future is as
sured, have offered Italy and France
easy terms at the moment, asking
only $4,000, 900 from the Italians and
$50, 900, 900 from the French on capt.
| tai sums which are fairly equal to
! those owed Britain.
| Viewpoints Are Different.
! The British idea is to collect while
| the collecting is good; the American
| conception is that it will fsr'3ys be
! possible TO collect and therefore that
easy terms now are without risk. Ana
| it must be frankly recognized that.
despite all the outward grace of the
| Balfour note, the British have driven
very much harder bargains with Their
debtors than we have with these
same countries. They have offered to
cancel at our expense, but short of
that they have taken good care to
look out for their own interests.
Churchill's second point in the re-
cent debate must seem relatively
trivial. Mellon argued that we had
provided our European associates
with the dollars to buy American
goods. but that we had bought the
British and French moneys necessary
to finance our military expenditures
in Europe. He argued that if Britain
and France had followed the Ameri-
can course and loaned us the money
to meet our expenses in those coun-
tries, then there would have been an
equality in position and the proposal
of a mutual cancellation might be
raised. AS it was, we paid cash.
Calls Argument Feeble.
Churchill. on his side, argues that
the cash we paid was in turn enl-
ployed to finance allied purchases in
the United States. But this is surely
feeble argument. We paid money
for what we got and the British took
this money and bought goods from
us in addition to those they obtained
on credit 1t establishes the point
that we did not lend them money TO
buy all they took of us. 1t makes
clear that they did not keep our
money, but they did get our goods
for it.
But, after all it is a rather melan-
choly task to examine the various
phases OF a dispute which continues
and must continue. The whole
Churchill note discloses the fact that
British public opinion will not accept
the American point of view and IN
sists that it's government shall deny
any official American statement set.
ting forth this American view. The
British people. as whole, regard the
American policy as unfair. unreason-
able and. to say the least, ungenerous.
Would Avoid Controversy.
Official Britain and the more
thoughtful Englishmen agree that it
would be better to avoid public con,
troversy which can get nowhere. But
the mass of the British people start
with the assumption that the Ameri-
can standpoint is wrong and should
be showed up" at every possible
opportunity. The result is the en-
during press criticism and the occa-
sional official explosion such as the
present Churchill note.
Yet it is manifest that just as long
as majority of the American people
Look at the debt question as a mere