LABOUR AND WAR

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 111, 7 November 1933, Page 7

LABOUR AND WAR

LEADERS' ATTITUDE

DIFFERENCE OF OPINION

STEIKE AS PEOTEST

United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright. LONDON, November 6. Sections of the Labour Party are becoming still more divided over British policy in tho event of the Locarno or League of Nations commitments involving the country in a possible war. • . Mr. Walter Citrine, general secretary of the Trades Union Council, at Peterborough, said that trade unionists were gravely disturbed at recent happenings. A war atmosphere had been generated, which threatened the peace of the world. It was no use assuming that the trade union movement could be used on any and every occasion war broke out in a remote part of the world. The present law of Britain made a general strike illegal, and it would be folly to resort to that method in a way exhorted by some quarters. The newspapers connect Mr. Citrine's speech with Sir Stafford Cripps's recent proposals in favour of a general strike against war. Mr. Arthur Henderson and other controllers of the Labour Party machine are also at loggerheads. Mr. George Lansbury is opposing the Locarno Treaty on the ground that a provision in. it is likely to drag Britain into war. An editorial in the official journal of the Labour Party definitely states that Britain is pledged to uphold the rule of law in international affairs. The policy of the Labour Party ia based on the conviction that questions of peace and war are the collective concern of all nations, and national security must be collectively" .secured. The matter, is specially interesting in view of the big anti-Locarno vote given Labour at recent by-elections. Speaking at Porth on Sunday, Mr. Lansbury said that when the Socialists got into power with the mass of soldiers and sailors behind them, the Socialist Government would know what to do with the officers who were treacherous in the day of trial.