RUNNING UP WHITE FLAG

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 171, 16 April 1937, Page 11

RUNNING UP WHITE FLAG

Allegation By Labour COMMONS DEBATE ON BILBAO BLOCKADE Minister Defends Attitude (British Official Wireless.) Rugby. April IS4. The presence of a number of foreign Ambassadors and Ministers-Plenipo-tentiarv in the distinguished strangers gallery' marked the interest aroused by the House of Commons debate on the Labour motion of censure in the following terms: “The House, taking note of the statement by the Prime Minister, Mr. Stanley Baldwin, on the situation at Bilbao.' deplores the failure of His Majestv’s Government to give protection 'to 'British merchant ships on their lawful occasions.” Moving the motion, the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. C. R. Attlee, said that the Opposition regarded the Government’s action in warning Biitisli ships against entering the port of Bilbao as a surrender of rights which had alwavs been maintained for British shipping and a surrender made in the face of a grave breach of international law. n , The Spanish insurgents had no belligerent rights and no right tc blockade Spanish ports, he said. The prevention of British ships trading with Spain was no part of the non-intervention policy so long as they carried neither munitions nor volunteers. Simple Issue Claimed. The issue, he claimed, was simple. British ships on their lawful occasions had been turned back by the rebels. What’was to be done? Cabinet came to a decision The Prime Minister made a firm declaration against interference with British shipping—the White Ensign was hoisted. Then it was run down and the white flag was run up: British ships were to all intents and purposes told they must not go to Bilbao. Vet there was no question this time of starting a world war or of trouble with a great foreign Power. The threat to which the Government had surrendered came from the rebels, whose land forces were on the run and who had no great naval strength. Mr. Attlee asked for detailed information of the evidence upon which the Government had reached its decision and the sources from which it came. Ho had decided that the rebel com-mander-in-chief General Franco, who was failing generally, was dependent for a local success upon starving women and children, and the British Government acquiesced. The Government had no right to put upon British sailors such a humiliation. Case for the Government. The first speaker in the debate for the Government w.as the Secretary of State for Home Affairs. Sir John Simon. He began by emphasising the adherence of the Government, in common with the Government of France, to the policy of non-intervention. He then recalled that in August and September last, when the naval preponderance in the civil war was still on the Government side, the Madrid authorities had sought to declare a blockade of Ceuta. Melilla, and other ports. The British Government refused to recognise the blockade, but then, just as now. directions were issued to British ships for their guidance, in view of the dangers which threatened. It was therefore impossible, he claimed, to maintain that the action taken in reference to the situation at Bilbao represented a new policy. Sir John Simon proceeded to give information on the situation derived principally from Admiralty reports. On Anril 6 the destroyer Blanche reported that there was a close blockade and that serious incidents were likely if merchant ships attempted to enter the port.

Desire of Government. When the report was received, the Blanche was instructed to inform any British merchant shin ,I'ound for Bilbao of this state of affairs and to advise it most strongly not to attempt to enter the port. Later the Government decided to inform British ships that it desired them not to enter Bilbao on account of the dangerous situation there. The action, he claimed, was on all fours with that taken last autumn. Of course, the Home Secretary added, the British Navy could force its way into any port in Spain. It could sweep a passage clear of mines. But that action would not bo consistent with the policy of non-intervention, to which it was their primary duty to bo faithful. General Franco had been told expressly that the British Government could not recognise belligerent rights and that the warning given to British ships would not be considered to have absolved him from responsibility for any damage to a British ship which disregarded the warning. Great Humanitarian Work. Sir John reminded the House that the British Navy had discharged for months great humanitarian work off the coasts of Spain. It had carried 17.000 innocent people to safety. But within the last two months, on the advice of the Admiralty, it had been thought unsafe, because of the danger from mines, for British warships to enter ports on the Basque coast, and work had had to bo done so far as possible by ships which were not mcn-o’-war.

Sir John claimed in conclusion that he had justified the Government's action to the House and to the country.