THE ITALO-GREEK CONFLICT

Mr. Salandra tries to justify Italy's attitude before the League Council. Geneva, September 18. — Mr. Salandra, representative of Italy on the Council of the League of Nations, presented this evening the point of view of his government concerning the question of the competence of the League of Nations in the Italian-Greek conflict.
He wanted to declare that the remarks he was going to make now only have a historical character, that is to say, relate to a period which, by unanimous agreement, is considered to be irrevocably closed. . -

Taking pledge
Responding first to the thesis supported by Branting, according to which the occupation of Corfu would be contrary to the principles of the pact, Mr. Salandra recalled that, from the first day of the occupation, the Italian government had declared that this occupation was made on a temporary basis and solely with a view to securing the reparations he had requested from Greece.

Italy has only followed illustrious examples -
Mr. Salandra then initiated a legal debate invoking a large number of authorities in international law to demonstrate that the occupation of a territory, as a guarantee, has always been admitted and recognized as a peaceful measure. England and France, he said, used it more frequently than other states. Italy, which has recently entered world history, has only followed illustrious examples. The pact of the League of Nations itself did not prohibit the use of this peaceful means of pressure. The Covenant is an essential and integral part of international law, but does not encompass it in its entirety.

The “first degree” of the Italian representative
After referring, with regard to Branting's criticism of the work of the Council, to the response made by Lord Robert Cecil, Mr. Salandra responds to the point of view developed by the British representative, on the interpretation of Articles 10 at 17 of the pact. He notes with him that the pact provides for a three-stage procedure: 1° discussion through diplomatic channels; 2 recourse to arbitration; 3° investigation by the Council of the League of Nations. Mr. Salandra noted that the dispute between Italy and Greece stopped at the first degree and fortunately dissipated in the same degree. The Italian government's thesis was that the Council of the League of Nations did not have to proceed with Greece's request, given that the Conference of Ambassadors had already been seized of it with the consent of both parties, and it considers that there is no longer any reason to speak of a question of jurisdiction concerning a conflict which has ceased to exist. The Italian delegate ends by saying that if the British delegate wishes this question of principle and the interpretation of the pact to be studied by authorized personalities independently of the solution of any particular cases, he will not oppose it.

Branting's reply
Branting said - the eloquent words of the distinguished Italian representative did not convince him. “I quite maintain my previous view,” said Branting, “that there is a difference between what was permitted before the compact and what is permitted now that all the states have adhered to it. It also seems to me that world opinion will have some difficulty in understanding that Italy's reprisals against Corfu are completely innocent and in conformity with the spirit of the pact." This declaration made a great impression, and Lord Robert Cecil said that on reflection, he attached very great importance to Mr. Salandra's presentation and would consider it very closely. He announced that he would be obliged to provide a new response during the day on Thursday. The Council adjourned until Thursday and it is feared, because of certain allusions by Mr. Salandra, relating to the action of certain powers and the parallelism that he attempted to establish between Italy and certain others, that the debate does not rebound and the question is not as closed as the Italian delegate seems to suggest in his speech.