This important communication was the subject of a general discussion; but this latest attempt of the League of Nations to assure the security of nations failed like its predecessors. M. Benei was not discouraged : "There is no reason," he said from the tribune, "to be pessimistic; time is necessary to enterprises like these." An examination of the successive proposals which the League of Nations had unavailingly adopted, shows that it was dominated by the memory of those days of 1914, which had preceded the war. It wanted to spare Europe fruitless efforts at negotiations such as those which at that time had broken against the uncompromis ing refusal of the Vienna cabinet to prolong the time allowed for Serbia's reply to the ultimatum ; which also were unable to over come the inertia of the Berlin chancellery obstinately declining the reiterated proposals of Sir Edward Grey. Moreover, it is plain that the absence of Germany from the League of Nations weighed in some measure on the assembly at Geneva, and that her attitude in the future was the principal concern of many.
It was noticed that Chamberlain, at the end of his communica tion to the Council, had suggested that special, purely defensive, agreements might be concluded by the interested Powers, whose differences were of such a nature as to give rise to fresh conflicts.
Negotiations Leading to Locarno.—Now, a new situation was created by a memorandum which Herr von Hoesch, the Ger man ambassador in Paris, had remitted on Feb. 9, 1925 to M. Her riot, then minister for foreign affairs. The German Government proposed the conclusion of an agreement by which England, France, Italy and Germany herself, undertook-for a period of time to be determined-not to make war upon each other. Ger many declared herself ready to conclude arbitration treaties with all the other Powers, and agreed to guarantee absolutely the status quo on the Rhine, as well as the demilitarization of the Rhine territories. The conclusion of such an agreement seemed to be the first step towards a world convention embracing all nations.
Herriot welcomed these suggestions, but he replied that it was necessary for him to inform his allies of them, and on May 12, following, Briand, who had succeeded Herriot at the Quai d'Orsay, communicated to Chamberlain his draft reply to Ger many. Among other things, he expressed the opinion that the re nouncing of war should not be limited to a period and that Bel gium as a Power directly interested ought to be associated with this new pact. After a voluminous correspondence, Briand, in complete accord with Chamberlain, was able to reply on June 16 to Stresemann. In this reply, he emphasized the fact that the
settlement of the question of security did not imply a modification of the Peace Treaties, and that the Allies, being members of the League of Nations, were bound by the Covenant which compre hended for them both rights and obligations. He concluded that an agreement with Germany could not be conceived unless Ger many, enjoying the same rights, but assuming the same obligations, herself entered into this League.
It was agreed, after an exchange of notes, that the judicial ex perts appointed by the interested Powers, should examine the technical sides of the problem thus raised, and finally that the ministers for foreign affairs should meet on Oct. 5 in Switzerland, for the German ambassador had declared that in the interest of a good understanding, it was necessary to settle the points of differ ence that separated the Powers, before his country became a mem ber of the League of Nations.
By the Treaty of Security, the signatory Powers individually guarantee the maintenance of the territorial status quo between Germany, Belgium and France, as well as the observance of the Peace Treaty as far as the demilitarization of the Rhine is con cerned. These three countries undertook never to have recourse to war, except in three cases: legitimate defence, the application of Article 16 of the Covenant, the appeal of the League of Nations in view of common action. In no circumstances whatever can this treaty be considered as a restriction of the mission of the League, the signatories having undertaken by a final Protocol to give their help to its work for disarmament.
It is, moreover, stipulated that in case of a conflict arising be tween Germany, Belgium and France and diplomacy failing to put an end to it, the question, if bearing on a disputed question of right, should be judicially determined; while questions of another kind should be dealt with by a Commission of Conciliation. Finally, if this latter course failed, the affair was to be settled by the Council of the League of Nations in conformity with Article 15 of the Covenant.