Page 160
Page 160
158
conflicts with the provisions of the Covenant of the League
of Nations."
#
It is by the deft insertion of the two words underlined
personal" and "own" that the French Government consider
that they have given sufficient expression to the "Gaus" inter-
pretation, 1,0., have safeguarded the case where a League
signatory attacks a League non-signatory. These words may
well escape general notice. Mr. Kellogg will certainly
refrain from challenging them unless he is obliged to do so.
In view of the character of the French reply I am clearly
of opinion that it would be a mistake for us to enter into an
elaborate argument on a subject which the other Powers have
treated so lightly. To do so would make it appear that
we were far harder to please than the Germans or even the
French and were creating difficulties which those Powers had
not raised. We should concentrate upon ourselves the whole
force of whatever criticism there may be and the proposed
Treaty might be wrecked upon our note.
In these circumstances I advise that our draft should
be amended in the form shown on the print which I now
circulate afresh. Sir Cecil Hurst is satisfied that
this is sufficient and, if sufficient, it is clearly wise
If my colleagues accept this view immediate notifica-
tion of the proposed changes should be made to the
Dominions for time presses. I should be grateful, there
fore, if those of my colleagues who agree to the altera-
tions would telegraph the single word "Yes" to me at the
Foreign Office. If any of them think that the matter
should be further discussed I would ask them to telegraph
"Wait" and in that case I would request the Prime Minister
to summon the Cabinet on Monday morning.
(Initialled) A.0.
Foreign Office,
13th July, 1928.
(11)
Page 160
Page 160
Page 160Page 161