From Our Own Correspondent.
Paris, Oct. 26.
France and (Switzerland are still unable to agre on the ques tion of the free zone in Savoy, which has been under discussion at intervals since 1919. The free zone was the outcome of the rearrangement of European territory after the downfall of Napoleon. Politically, it is just as French as any other part of the country, but fiscally it stands apart and "any goods from Switzerland can be imported into it duty free. 'This system is particularly con venient for the inhabitants of Geneva, og it provides them with w source of fod' supplies from the French districts that lio so close to their territory, The French naturally desired to exercise full rights over their own departments, and they took the opportunity offered after the great war to abolish the free zone. This abolition is laid down in article 435 of the Treaty of Versailles, but the two Governments differ as to its interpretation. The French say that it does away with the trea zone definitely and completely, whereas the Swiss do not sce why they as neutrals should have an established right taken away from them by the belligerents, and they maintain that article 435 does not permit of the abolition of the free zones without a previous agreement between Paris and Berne. Finally, as the negotiations made no progress, M. Poincaré announced that the French Customs stations would be moved up to the political frontier on November 10. This immediately galvanised the Federal Council. Diplomatic Notes have been exchanged, tha Swiss Minister in Paris has interviewed M. Poincaré, and Switzerland _proposed that the dispute should be referred to the High Court of Justice at The Hague. To this M. Poincaré has replied in a long Note which simply makes Switzerland responsible for the delay in coming to a settlement. Nothing is said about arbitration or any withdrawal of the decree to move the Customs posts. Theoretically the machinery set up cly the Teague of Nations ought to be just what is required to deal with an international difficulty of the kind that has divided France and Switzerland, but here we find another illustration of the uawillingness of great nations to arbitrate with smaller ones except on questions without any real im portance. M. Poincaré's attitude towards Switzerland is in reality that of Signor Mussolini towards Greece, though unaccompanied by external manifestations and threats of force. It looks as if arbitration by the League of Nations will fail in practice because
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.