THE BRITISH BILL

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 82, 7 April 1933, Page 7

THE BRITISH BILL

FEELING IN COMMONS

SECOND READING DEBATE

LONDON, April 6. A crowded House of Commons cheered Sir John Simon, when he rose to move the second reading of the Bill giving the Government power to prohibit the importation of Soviet goods. He used no rhetoric. Members were deeply impressed and listened in profound silence. It was a long time since thero had been such tension at Westminster. ' Sir John Simon's voice soared when he demanded: "What would you have the Government do when you know that fellow-subjects arc in peril?" He confirmed roports that Sir Esmond Ovey was not returning to Moscow unless there was a very unexpected development, saying that the Ambassador had taken a three years' lease of a flat in London. Continuing the debate, the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. W. Runciman) said that while everyone desired a fair settlement, this precarious business must not give away our fellowcountrymen's rights. Tho staging of sabotage trials was frequent in Russia, and careful search revealed not a single instance of acquittal. Everythiifcj had been done to encourage trade with Eussia, but events like this made it impossible for British firms to tender for contracts in view of the risks to their employees in Eussia. The withdrawal of our Ambassador would not touch the Soviet Government in any sensitive spot, but the present Bill would empower action which the Soviet would understand. Sir Herbert Samuel sought an assurance that if tho prisoners' case was settled tho embargo would not be used. Mr. Runciman said that he could not give an undertaking in advance of events, but thero was no intention to uso the powers to infringe Free Trade principles. Tho Bill was read the second time by 347 votes to 48. The Samuelite Liberals, being dissatisfied with Mr. Eunciman's answer, refused to vote.