World Conferences

In Rome the smoking hot impatience of Benito Mussolini for fewer words and more action at numerous Conferences now facing the Great Powers erupted in a speech to the Italian Senate last week by hazel-eyed, spade-bearded Foreign Minister Dino Grandi, most trusted henchman of the Dictator.

"Can we close our eyes," cried Signer Grandi, "to the fact that hundreds of millions of men throughout the whole world feel that their peace, their daily bread depend on the solution of a few fundamental problems?"

These problems have not yet been solved, declared Signer Grandi, because "statesmen have permitted themselves to be impeded by technicalities." Urging sacrifices all round in the name of world unity "to solve the technical and juridical problems of reparations . . . treaties . . . and disarmament," Signer Grandi exhorted, "We must all set examples! Only thus can the present crisis of confidence be solved."

At Lausanne the Great Powers, invited by Great Britain, are scheduled to meet June 16 in a Conference to deal with German Reparations; debts of the Allies to each other and to the U. S.; and German long-and short-term private debts. The Lausanne Conference, scheduled originally for last January, was postponed in hope that the U. S. would finally agree to cancellation of much of what Europe owes, a hope which Congress had already dashed as hard as possible (TIME, Dec. 21). Last week in Great Britain, host to the Lausanne gathering, the opinion was general that absence of an official U. S. delegation from the Conference table plus the formation at Berlin of the most reactionary Cabinet Germany has had since 1918 (see p. 16), completely "doomed and ruined'' chances of success at Lausanne.

Nevertheless all countries concerned seemed determined last week to "get it over with" even should the Lausanne Conference reach a complete deadlock, the idea being to make way for the

London Conference. In effect this new Conference (news of which leaked out prematurely but was confirmed last week by both the U. S. State Department and the British Foreign Office) would be to circumvent Congress which made U. S. participation at Lausanne impossible. At London the U. S. will participate, announced the State Department, but "the proposed Conference would have nothing to do with War debts, reparations, disarmament, or any other than purely economic subjects." Meeting at London, probably in October, this conclave would be called the "London Economic Conference," the "Second Part of the Lausanne Conference," or the "Conference to Stabilize International Prices."

Calling the London Conference "the best news in weeks." the London Times showed candidly what Europe is getting at by the remark: "It would be . . . ridiculous to suggest that the stabilization of world commodity prices is independent of the problem of international debts."

Thus the world stage was tentatively set last week for a dummy Lausanne Conference to be followed by a London Conference at which superhuman efforts would be made to sway U. S. public opinion and eventually crack Congress' anti-cancellation coconut.

Naturally the London Conference would provide a fine forum for diplomatic haggling over tariffs. Great Britain with her brand, new tariff wall (TIME. March 14) is now for the first time in a position to bargain tariffwise with the U. S.

At Geneva the "Disarmament Conference"* remained so inactive as to be almost unnoticed, four months after it convened (TIME, Feb. 15). In a fit of temper Belgian Senator Louis de Brouckere threatened the Committee on Effectives, of which he is chairman, with his resignation if the Committee did not promptly decide "whether youths receiving preliminary training/- should be counted in estimating national effectives" with a view to discussing eventually the limitation or reduction of effectives.

It being impossible promptly to reach so vital (though preliminary) a decision, everyone joined in calming down Senator de Brouckere. With the chiefs of nearly all the Great Power delegations absent in their own capitals but with every Geneva hotel still packed with underlings, the Conference stagnated. Typical was an address by U. S. Delegate Dr. Mary Emma Woolley to the Committee on Moral Disarmament. Mentioning that she has received thousands of letters since the Conference began, Delegate Woolley read several from children. "I have thought of a good idea." wrote Thomas King, 11. of New York. "If guns and firearms are taken away from the people; if they want war let them fight with rotten eggs, tomatoes, and maybe grapefruit."

Monetary Conference? Rumors in Washington that the London Conference would discuss silver and the possibility of world bimetallism were not discouraged by the State Department which seemed anxious to put off to autumn as many issues as possible. Meanwhile what of the gold standard? Can the U. S. and France remain on? How have Britishers fared since their money went off gold last September?

The world gold position was as follows, according to the latest (May) bulletin of the U. S. Federal Reserve Board:

Total Monetary Gold Holdings Holdings Per Capita

United States $3,986,000,000 $32.47

France 3,012,000.000 72.15

England 588.000,000 15.74

Switzerland 471,000,000 117.22

Spain 434,000,000 19.07

Netherlands 354,000.000 44.57

Belgium 349,000,000 43.30

U. S. S. R. 330,000,000 2.24

Italy 296,000,000 7.03

Argentina $249,000.000 $22.84

Japan 214.000.000 3.20

Germany 209,000,000 3.35

India 162,000.000 .46

All other 796,000,000 .76

Thus the U. S. and France remained strongly bulwarked on the gold standard, holding between them more than half the world's supply of monetary gold. But, per capita, Frenchmen are more than twice as rich in gold as U. S. citizens and Swiss are four times richer.

In Great Britain the effect of taking Sterling off gold and erecting tariff barriers has been thus far to give Sterling stock, bond and commodity prices a remarkable stability compared to similar U. S. prices in gold dollars. Thus, since last August, U. S. stock prices are down some 41%, but similar stocks in Great Britain still sell in pounds for some 94% of their former price. Such "comparative stability" might seem false if British commodity prices had greatly upped, but they have not risen in terms of Sterling more than 5%.

Arresting, these facts have led such British financiers as President Walter Runciman of the Board of Trade to assert that since last September "gold has fluctuated rather than sterling."

Should the London Conference seriously consider world money problems it would have to weigh not only those of the gold standard countries and of the silver standard countries such as China and Mexico, but also the monetary status of Russia whose currency is pure paper, virtually fiat money. As a final fillip to the London Conference negotiations last week came this: the U. S. State Department, which refuses to recognize Russia, intimated to His Majesty's Government that the Soviet Union ought to be invited to the London Conference.

Churchmen Intervene. Eight Anglican bishops and 42 other prominent British churchmen, including Baptists, Wesleyans and Congregationalists, appealed to the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America last week.. Said they: "[Let] all who owe allegiance to Christ" . . . use all their influence to press for cancellation of Reparations ... in the name of Jesus, the Prince of Peace."

*Full name: Conference pour la Reduction et pour la Limitation des Armaments.

/- Such as the 325,127 Fascist Avanguardisti.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.