Evening star., 1933-02-05
BY FRANK H. SIMONDS.

BY FRANK H. SIMONDS.
n VOW that debt conferences in
nj washington are an assured fact
" and events are proceeding with
L the rapidity of a mill race. it
becomes particularly necessary
to appreciate definitely the position of
the nations who are to negotiate with
us. Nor Is 1t less essential to recog-
nize that, while in theory the European
states will come separately and talk
independently, the British action will
be decisive, and in practice England
is going to act as the spokesman for all
Europe.
This primary truth results from the
fact that 1t was the British who were
responsible for the making of the Lau-
same agreements at the great confer
ence last Summer But for Macdonald
there would have been no settlement of
the reparations issue. None of the
other creditors of Germany, and, of
course, France was the most consid-
cradle, would ever have dreamed of
making what amounted to a complete
cancellation of the German obligations
save for the inSistence Of the British
prime minister.
In calling upon the European ma
tions to agree to the policy of "the
sponge and clean slate" Macdonald
not only successfully imposed the Brit
ish view upon the representatives Of
other countries. but also-at least
morally-undertook certain obligations,
particularly to France. Italy and Bel
both in German payments and consid-
erably indebted to the United States.
Britain, thanks to Macdonald, assumed
leadership in Europe on the repara-
tions question, the Lausanne settlement
was the British solution and the Brit
ish were therefore bound to defend it
thereafter. And defense involved bring
ing the United States to the point of
dealing with debts in the spirit of
Lausanne.
That is the first point to be remem-
bered in examining the prospects of the
forthcoming discussions in Washing
ton. Both the paying and non-paying
countries Of last December are going to
wait upon British diplomatic activities.
And the speech of Neville Chamber
lain in Leeds and the subsequent note
to Washington accepting the invitation
of the President-elect clearly bear out
this Interpretation. For in both is the
clear intimation that the Washington
agreement must not fail to accord with
the Lausanne settlement.
Reich Agreement Cited.
Now as to the Lausanne settlement
itself, 1t Is to be recalled that the
creditors Of Germany agreed to wipe
out all the obligations of the defeated
nation of the World War in return for
a single payment of $715,000, 900. That
payment was to be made out of the
proceeds of a bond issue floated upon
the world market under carefully speci-
fed conditions. But, while the terms
Of the settlement left it open to doubt
whether the payment would ever be
made, there was no question over the
fact that the figure fixed was the most
Germany would be called upon to meet.
If the British debt settlement with
the United States-and all others as
wells to be framed to accord with
the Lausanne agreement, then it is
plain that Britain, France, Italy and
Belgium will not pay in Washington
more than they collect in Berlin. And
the respective shares for the four ma
tions in German payments are: Britain,
S160,000.000; France, s370, 600, 900; Italy,
$4,000 900, and Belgium, s35 ,000, 900.
This constitutes total of s6s5, 900 900,
while the sum Of the war debts of these
four countries to America is about
$l1,000, 100000.
1t is clear, as Chamberlain said
quite frankly, that the British thesis
envisages practical cancellation. AS in
the case of German reparations, the
payment is to be token payment, de-
signed to preserve the forms of inter-
national good faith, that and nothing
more. If, too, the United States asks
any of the debtor nations payment in
excess of its share of the reparations
payments, then such demand directly
compromises the Lausanne agreement,
since such country would be free to
reject the Lausanne settlement and
ask more from Germany. And against
any such process Britain has firmly
set her face.
Next in order of importance is the
British determination not to combine
of such issues as the return of Britain
to the gold standard or the readjust-
ment Of tariffs. That means only one
thing, namely that Britain is coming
to Washington not to bargain about
debt reduction. but to talk about it as
necessary detail in world reconstruc-
ton. The British mean to discuss it
not as a business question between the
United States and Great Britain, but
as a matter in which the two countries
are similarly concerned, because it con-
stitutes vital circumstance in any
attempt to end the world depression.
The British are obviously willing, as
detail in reaching debt settlement.
to agree to consider currency and
tariffs at subsequent world economic
conference where all nations will be
present, but that is all The idea of
private bargain between America and
Britain, of barter of debt claims for
currency policy, is rejected firmly and
finally by the British government and
the British public. The British case is
simply that debt payments being hence
forth impossible in fact and indefinitely
harmful to world prosperity in theory,
the business of the Washington con-
ference is limited to abolishing them
with a minimum of delay and q maxi
mum of finality.