§ 45. Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the Prime Minister if he is aware that on 17th June, 1925, the plenipotentiaries of 30 States, including this country, signed a Convention accepting the prohibition of the use in war of asphyxiating poison or other gases and all analogous liquids, materials, and devices; that since that date France and Venezuela have ratified; and why His Majesty's Government has not ratified, in view of the French contention that ratification by a minority of States only binds them not to use these instruments of warfare against the other States who have ratified?
§ The PRIME MINISTERHis Majesty's Government think it inexpedient to ratify until all important Powers have ratified the Protocol, or have signified their intention of doing so.
§ Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYBut does not the right hon. Gentleman see that this attitude will prevent anything being arrived at; and cannot we ratify on the same terms as the French Republic, whereby we are not bound until other States have done so?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo. I have nothing to add to the statement I have made.
§ Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYBut. does not the right hon. Gentleman think it advisable to set. an example in a case of this sort, especially in view of the great indignation which he expressed during the War at the first use of poison gas?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo. I think that if we wait, before ratification, as I suggest, it will be the best way of achieving our end.
Mr. BECKETTDoes the right hon. Gentleman not think that on an 212 important matter like this there is a danger of every Great Power waiting for the other one, and so of nothing being done?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo Powers, so far as I am aware, have yet signified their intention even of ratifying.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIs the right hon. Gentleman not of opinion that if men are to be murdered in war, if the gas used is a painless gas, asphyxiation is not nearly so cruel as a bullet or a bayonet?
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYDo we understand that France has not ratified?