Armament > Conference for the control of the international trade in arms, munitions and implements of war

45
Commission would be able to put forward and explain to the Committee of Enquiry some
of the more important Governmental objections to the various projects now before
the Temporary Mixed Commission.
4. Further, it should be possible in this way to prepare the ground for an interna¬
tional conference and to draft a basis of discussion for such a conference, which would
have good prospects of success.
5. By such a combination of views, it should not be impossible to arrive at a pre¬
liminary agreement as to basic principles which, while probably being acceptable to
Governments, would also find favour with the Temporary Mixed Commission and par¬
ticularly with those members of it who are the authors of the various projects now
under examination.
The Chairman pointed out that these proposals were not in agreement with the views which
had been expressed in the Commission on the previous day. It had been decided that there should
be no immediate collaboration between the Temporary Mixed Commission and the Permanent
Advisory Commission by means of a joint committee. Further, it appeared difficult to reconcile
these proposals with the procedure suggested by M. Lebrun. There were, moreover, certain sug¬
gestions, such as the suggestion for an international conference, which appeared to go a good deal
further than appeared to be for the moment necessary.
Viscount Cecil observed that there had been no decision on the part of the Commission
which excluded direct collaboration with the Permanent Advisory Commission. It had merely
been decided that a joint committee should not be appointed for a particular purpose. It was
most desirable that the two commissions should keep in touch. The proposals of Colonel Lowe
were admittedly difficult to reconcile with the procedure laid down by M. Lebrun.
He hoped that the proposals he had submitted to the Committee, together with those which
had been presented by M. Jouhaux, would be discussed and that a decision would be taken in
regard to them.
The Chairman said he had not intended to suggest that contact between the two commissions
was excluded, but the proposal for the appointment of a joint committee had been definitely
set aside on the previous day. It had, moreover, been decided that all the questions under consi¬
deration should be referred to the Sub-Commission, and this procedure could not be reconciled
with the proposals presented by Colonel Lowe.
Colonel Lowe said he did not quite see how his proposals were in conflict with the procedure
suggested by M. Lebrun. M. Lebrun had maintained that it was necessary for expert opinion
to be taken on the schemes before the Commission. Would it not be well for the Sub-Commis¬
sion to consult the experts who were close at hand ?
He could not see any prospect of progress unless the views of the Governments and authorities
outside could be taken at an early stage. He made his proposal merely with a view to facilitating
the work of the Sub-Commission, and he would not insist upon it if it did not meet with the approval
of the members of the Commission.
Colonel Requin thought it was possible to reconcile the proposals of Colonel Lowe with those
of M. Lebrun. He recognised the need of co-operation between the two Commissions. The
question arose as to the method of this collaboration and the stage at which it should be secured.
Colonel Lowe had expressed the desire that there should be an immediate collaboration. He
would point out, however, that the Permanent Advisory Commission, if it were to give useful
advice, would need a definite text on which the Governments could be consulted. Let the Sub-
Commission examine the draft schemes which were before the Commission, establish a single
text and forward it, after its discussion, to the Permanent Advisory Commission for the views
of that body.
The Chairman said that the Commission was in agreement with the spirit of Colonel Lowe's
proposals. Details of these proposals, however, were not in harmony with the proposal to refer
the questions at issue to the First Sub-Commission of the Temporary Mixed Commission. Colonel
Lowe had suggested a special committee of enquiry.
Viscount Cecil asked when the discussion and vote would be taken on the proposals which
he had himself submitted to the Commission and on the proposals of M. Jouhaux.
M. Jouhaux said he had already asked that this resolution should be discussed and voted on
in the plenary Commission, and that it should not be referred to the Sub-Commission. He
assumed that the closure of the discussion would not imply that his resolution would be referred
to the Sub-Commission.
M. Fabry said that the Sub-Commission would not present a report to the Temporary Mixed
Commission until its next session. For the enlightenment of the Sub-Commission it was proposed
that the plenary Commission should read the three schemes which had been presented and the
proposals of Viscount Cecil, and that there should be an exchange of views without any vote.
The minutes of the Commission would be forwarded to the Sub-Commission.
The resolutions of M. Jouhaux were in a different position, and it would be for the plenary
Commission to discuss them if it thought fit.
Viscount Cecil said he hoped the Commission would take a vote on his resolutions. No
one was opposed to them, and he thought it extremely desirable that the Sub-Commission should
have some indication of the principles accepted by the Commission. If no decision were taken
on these general principles, the only result of the work of the present session of the plenary Com¬
mission would be a reference of the question to a Sub-Commission.