THREE-LINE WHIP.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 3000, 19 December 1935, Page 7

THREE-LINE WHIP.

SUMMARY MANDATE.

Tories Must Vote in Peace Plan

Division. - "THE TIMES" STRONG LEAD. United Press Association.—Copyright. (Received IX a.m.) LONDON", December 18. i The Government is issuing a threeline Avhip, the most summary of all mandates, ensuring that except in cases of serious illness all Conservatives must vote in to-morrow's debate on the peace plan. "Tlie Times" points out that if it were possible for a vote to be taken without the intervention of whigs there would be little doubt that a motion like tlie Labour party's would be carried in the present mood of the House of Commons. A noteworthy feature of the uproar has been the strong lead taken by "The Times" in the campaign for the rejection of the plan, beginning on Friday with the declaration that "It is already dead." "The Times" Parliamentary correspondent makes the surprising announcement in the light of M. Laval's supposed earlier • skeleton rattling to frighten Sir Samuel Hoare, that Ministers were informed at yesterday's Cabinet meeting that France had not yet stated her attitude towards an oil embargo. In a leading article the paper asks: "How could Sir Samuel Hoare have thought the peace proposals would fulfil their own canon of being acceptable to Italy, Abyssinia and the League? Why did the Cabinet consider it must either endorse the proposals or repudiate Sir Samuel Hoare? "The only answer which can secure a vote of confidence is a plain declaration that the proposals were not panicky or a reversal of policy, but simply a report to the League of an effort to ascertain the terms, however unsatisfactory, on which negotiations can be begun; that they were not British ideas of what is just and practicable; and also that the Government intends collectively to resist aggression." The Parliamentary correspondent says that if a vote is taken on a direct negative to the Labour motion many Government members will abstain from voting. They prefer voting for an amendment such as has been tabled by a group headed by Brigadier-General E. L. Spears (Con., Carlisle) pronouncing the proposals unacceptable and urging a resumption of the policy which the country overwhelmingly endorsed at the general election, which would be heavily supported. OUTCOME OF DEBATE. PRESS SPECULATIONS. British Official Wireless. (Received 1.30 p.m.) RUGBY, December 18. It is. understood that the Government will regard the Labour Opposition's motion upon which the debate in the House of Commons will be raised tomorrow as a vote of censure, which will be resisted to the fullest extent. In view of the current division of opinion among Government followers, interest attaches to the terms of the amendment which was handed in last night by several younger Government supporters, as follows: — "This House, recognising that the proposals set out in tlie White Paper for the settlement of the Italo-Ethiopian dispute are unacceptable, urges His Majesty's Ministers to resume tlie policy outlined in September by the Foreign Secretary at Geneva and overwhelmingly endorsed by the country at the recent General Election." "The Times" says that if it is possible to press this amendment to a division it will be carried by a large majority, for it undoubtedly represents the sentiments of the House of Commons as a whole. Th'e "Daily Telegraph," however, says tlie forms of procedure in the House may be held to render impossible the moving of a reasoned amendment on these lines on a vote of censure. In any event, it adds, Mr. Baldwin in his closing speech in the debate will make the matter a vote of confidence, and, despite a number of Conservative abstentions from the division, the result will be a great majority for the Government. AMERICAN VIEWS. Condemnation of Peace Plan Crystallising. "A CONQUEROR'S PEACE." NEW YORK, December 18. While slow to crystallise or even to be expressed, American reaction to the Hoare-Laval plan has finally taken form. The amount of comment is surprisingly small, but it is from indicative sources. The main points are condemnation of the plan as "a conqueror's peace"; the creation of a difficult position for America's future co-opera-tion with tlie League of Nations; and the need for further clarification of the American neutrality policy. Senator W. E. Borah calls the proposal incredible, and says it would "make the League a subservient instrument of imperialism. Thank God we are out of it." The "New York Sun," in a leader, says: "Only those who put their trust in sweetly sentimental phraseology instead of the cold and often unpleasant truth should feel chagrin at the discovery that the dominant European Powers have indeed looked first to what they believed to be their own interests, which are not the interests of the United States." The "New York Times" emphasises that all is not yet known concerning the reasons for the plan, but that "public sentiment at once pronounced it both immoderate and impossible." Mr. Walter Lippman, the noted publicist, advances the interesting thought that we do not know the true explanation of the motives of the plan, but that its value must be balanced against the cost of destroying Mussolini "as one of the pillars, fragile though it be, »f the status quo in Central Europe."