The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. TUESDAY, AUGUST 26. 1924. CAPACITY TO RECEIVE.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 202, 26 August 1924, Page 4

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 26. 1924. CAPACITY TO RECEIVE.

for the tuiztrr m tKe dtttwnee,

■• Xo-- tiat a n>--.r settlement ■β-ith Germany if almost complete, there are 3 fre=h expressions of the fear that the payment of reparations will injure Br;;:sh trade. One report Kay? thit German toymakerp. using tie ioa.a to :>e- raised ior Germany, intend to capture the world's market*-, and another that Germany, trith the ht'.v of coal tsnpT'bes cheapened by tins settlement, , will double her pre-war exporta. So 'authority i= gives for the first report. and the second is merely eonjeetnre, but ; these items are worth noting a= pointing' to a problem whi<~h has exrrcised ■ the minds of many thinkers s:nc= the j end of tie •β-ej. It max be put briefv - this ivay: To what tittm can the A.ijee, , and eFjiecially Britain, afford to receive reparation* ? Th.'f is a question wiuch. so B tht "Economist" remarks- is comment on r tiit Daves report, the inreetigsting coraj icittefcs did Dot toD-i.. The report - "does nnt deai at a*3 v-ith the very '. difficult qnesuon of the capacity of all 1 otiier coiintr:?:? to receive rt-paritiona t trjtho'jt Tindue ditturbanee cf their c life.* 1 5 I iie arg-dsec: of those trhc, coabt U^e j capacity of the Allies to receive what they liave -R-ishfed to iziipose Lrieliv ] luat must pay reuaration? ( rntilr-ij in f:oc>d-% tiiat tL:£ iiood ul ■■ goods will lead to linciapj-jvirieat in t-ije courtries to winch rtparaiions are ■ vtid, and that the oblifraijon to pay I t!»2i.e dfibts may produce In Germany r habits of indtijtry au3 rtandird: o? ; even more formidable industrially than i before the ivar. This is the greatest ■ problem of the kind in history. After ; the FraniD-Prussian war GermtDy ; enacted an indemnity of two hundred , millions. Then, however, the problem [ was relativeiy ejEple. The ivar had ! been short, and tae interference with , finance and uade not comparable with ■ that of the Great tt'ar. The FrencS ! had le.rpe resenes of wealth, tnur I credit fctood hiph, and industry was ' active. According to Mr. R-t-jrinald ' M<ii.(:nna, n ieading Ecplish authority en' finance, the improved standard oi eSVienry in prtnluction forced on * France endured lon£ tlfier the period of indemnity. but tne rersipt oi the I miliions by Germany "neiped to produce « d'-'presEion there, and Bismarck if ' EE.jd 'to have declared ihii the ncxi I time he defeated Frante he wcuid insist on paying an indemnity. Mr. McKenna. tpeaking ior.jr be for? the Dawcs ' Committee was thought of. ?aid that is • Germany could pay tvhat tras dei manded oi her, the oniy fi ! obtaining the money would lie by - in- , creasing her exports. "To do IMb «i ; the teeth of the competition of other i manufacturing nations i-it-e must work lonsrer hour? for less -w-ages. She must rut profits, the must reduce her • imuortE to the indispensable micini'jiE." Her competitors, faced with pro-sricg TinpTiiT.'mt triPTiT and heavy trade losses, i would be compelled to reduce wsges ! and cut profits, and there would be a '. jreneral lowering of the standard of I life. If this danger i? real. Britain runs I the most serious risk of injury. For : Britain if much more of a manufacturing i counrry than Franre. and has always ! fe!t German L-omjipiition more severely. ;I* the efject of imT'Ot.jnu reparationa on G-PT-many is t-i etimnlale German :iidu.=trT. British manu factarers may be ; oUst?d, not only from their home i TnarkptF.. but from valuable neutral on«E. i Britain will puffer this coTOp'-titiort j mainly for thr "ifijcfit of France, which ,is thf principal v ifB r fi"iarT under the reparation? Rrtt!<-:ri*iit. A«-t»rdmg to an official statrnwm of accounts. 'Britain's net receipt! Up to the end of K)22 amonntpd to about elevpi millions c and it is indicia- ' t:v.- nf tha forapleiity of th» -B-hoU-Pγ--!. 1 ?!!: that the "Economist" should remark thai "th?re is room for trrpr.t jdiilerence of opinion a? to whether this ' alleged Brjtifch Buryilug if paid by Ger- : many at all or whetlieT it i? not ratlicr I njocpy found by the British cons"Tner of German jroodt." Allied Btaiefmeii. however, are leaving the problem 'of capacity to receive for the future to ! settle. It i= enoueh for them that GerImany is morally responsible, and that I Ehfi must accordingly pay as much as JEhe can. 1