VINDICATION OF BRITAIN

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21714, 22 February 1936, Page 15

VINDICATION OF BRITAIN

MATTER OF "SECRET" REPORT PUBLICATION IN ITALY NOT EXPLAINED SARCASTIC LONDON COMMENT (UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION—COPIBIOHT.) (Received February 21, 9.15 p.m.) LONDON, February 21. The political correspondent of the "Daily Mail" says a closer watch on known secret, agents in London, and increased care in the circulation of Government documents to Ministers and officials, will follow the leakage of the Maffey report, which officials are still unable to explain. In spite of enquiries in Paris, Brussels, Berlin, Rome and Addis Ababa, and startled officials receiving urgent telephone calls asking them to account for their copies of the reoort, the Parliamentary correspondent of "The Times" doubts whether it will be possible to trace the culprit after the long interval. He adds: "The report did not express the Government's view, and consequently Ministers do not regard its publication as embarrassing, especially as it bears out the contention that the British attitude towards Abyssinia is altruistic and unselfish." . It is now understood that Mr K. A. Eden (Foreign Secretary) will make a statement on the matter on February 24, when questions will be The Rome correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph" believes that the documents were not purloined, but photographed while in the possession of a British diplomat in Africa, and that a copy was forwarded to Rome. The incident continued to cause excitement all day in the various capitals. Mr Winston Churchill, after question time in the House of Commons, fruitlessly attempted to extract information from the Government, but the Speaker ruled that time was insufficient. •Mr Churchill insisted, and Mr Baldwin half rose, uncertain of the position, but subsided in his seat as the Chief Government Whip (Captain D. Margesson) gently tugged his coat-tails. Mr Baldwin later announced that the House of Commons would discuss foreign affairs on February 24, and later still it was unofficially stated that Mr Eden would make a statement on Friday. There is so far no indication how the leakage occurred. The report was headed "Secret" in red ink, and was also marked, "property of the British Government." Secrecy is being maintained about the nature and extent of the investigations. "Good Turn" to Britain According to one report from Rome the document was obtained by the Italian secret service. The British Embassy refuses to comment on a suggestion that the document was stolen from the Embassy. . The "Morning Post" and the "Manchester Guardian" both mention the French discomfiture at the reference in the report to the "secret Franco-Italian agreement reached at the beginning of January 1935, on Ethiopia." French circles reaffirm that there was no such agreement giving Italy .a free hand It is suggested that this obviously refers to Signor Mussolini's assurance to France of the safety of the Djibouti railway. The majority of the newspapers emphasise that Signor Gayda has done Britain a good turn by the publication of the report, as it has disproved the allegations of imperialism, hypocrisy, and the misuse of .the league in selfish intGFGStS The "Daily Herald" sarcastically thanks Signor Mussolini for reflecting credit on Britain and disproving his own favourite arguments. The "Daily Telegraph" sarcastically pays a tribute to Signor Gayda's candour, by which, snatching at a shadow and claiming British approval for the Italian invasion, he has completely discomfited the Italian propagandists. "The Times," in a leading article, says that the only mystery about the document is that the Duce thought that its publication would be profitable. It adds: "The propaganda which defended its cause by apocryphal dum-dum bullets and equally apocryphal activities of the British military attache will have difficulty in twisting this story to its, advantage. The disclosure leaves the Italian case even worse than before." Italian View The Rome correspondent of the "Morning Post" says that the argument in the British report has been emphasised in such a way as to make it appear that Britain had a full knowledge of Italy's intentions and wai in accord with the Italian arguments and ambitions for extensive zones in Ethiopia. , What little comment is obtainable in London denies such accord. It is emphasised that the report preceded the naming of Italy as the aggressor by the League of Nations, and that it had no relation to the duties "of Britain as a member of the league. The "Popolo d'ltalia" says: "The flimsy contention that the British attitude was intended to support the league has now definitely crumbled. The truth is that the result of the British policy has been simply disastrous. She has put the world in a turmoil and God knows when the waters will be stilled. Does it pay England to persist in this obstinacy when there are arguments like the armies of Marshal Badoglio and General Graziam? We can afford the luxury of advising her to revise her attitude, and we quote for Britain's notice, the Latin proverb: 'lt is human to err, but it is devilish to persist in error."' The Rome correspondent of The Times" says that diplomatic quarters regard the publication of the document as inexplicable, as the impression is universal that it redounds greatly to British credit and shows the departmental experts to be men of wide vision, noticeable impartiality, and moderation. The Rome correspondent of the "Daily Mail" points.out that other, circles regard the document as import, because it confirms the state-

ment that Signor Mussolini, in January, 1935, offered to discuss the Abyssinian situation.