CAB23-58 — Page 160

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