PEACE BALLOT

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 22, 25 July 1935, Page 23

PEACE BALLOT

TESTING OF BRITAIN

REMARKABLE RESULT

QUESTIONS AND EEPLY

(From "Tho Post's" Representative.) LONDON, June 29. Lord Cecil of Chelwood, at a great meeting at the Royal Albert Hall, announced the remarkable results of the Peace Ballot. The audience of about 10,000 was predominantly middleaged, with about two women to every man. It was a quiet, matter-of-fact meeting, but the audience, mainly those who had assisted in the organisation of the ballot, .were^ manifestly delighted with the result of their work. The grand total of votes cast in the ballot was 11,627,765. In order to understand the significance of this vote it is necessary to go back to the time when the scheme was first launched. A considerable section of the Press discovered certain dangers in the ballot. That they have retained their opinion is evident from the fact that they/have taken little notice of the result of the poll; Its organisers were accused of attempting to make party capital out of it. When the scheme was started eminent Conservatives advised the public to have nothing to do with it. Other Conservatives advised their constituents to fill in the papers, The assumption'that it was a" "peace" ballot was challenged. The promoters were accused of using the undeniable desire of the nation for peace for the purpose of supporting a policy which was controversial. The fifth question included a vote on military measures against aggressor nations, and for that reason the scheme was pronounced by some people to be the "ballot of blood." A number of -eminent officials of the League of Nations Union announced that they would have nothing to do with the ballot. In spite of this unpropitious launching. Lord Cecil and his helpers persisted in their project. "COLLECTIVE SECURITY." Addressing his audience in the Albert Hall, Lord Cecil said that when the plan was started fifteen months ago many of their most prudent counsellors thought-it would be a fizzle. He hoped for about five millions. In fact, they had got nearly, twelve millions. This number was not evenly distributed. Apart from London, where very special conditions prevailed, it varied from 12 per cent, of the possible total in King's Lynn up to 86 per cent, in Montgomeryshire. Wales, indeed, had been marvellous with an average poll of 62 per cent., and ten constituencies better than the best in the neighbouring kingdom. "This is the kind of occasion," he said, "when I like to remember that my family originally came from Wales." But Scotland,-particu-larly in the east and in the islands, as well as Lancashire, Yorkshire, and the North of England generally, were very good, and so were many other regions. This wonderful result had been due to several causes. First, there were the attacks of Lord Beaverbrook and his friends—joined in by all who disliked or .distrusted the League of Nations. Then there was the very foolish talk about the unfairness of the questions and the suggestion that the citizens of this educated country could not understand a few simple sentences. But on this subject very many of the common people knew more than some of the richer classes. "The voters," continued Lord Cecil, "understood very well that in a democratic country—and, thank goodness, we Mill' live in?a/democracy—all depended on the ( opinion of the people. If the people want a policy of peace based on the League, and can make their wishes known, that will be the policy of their Government. Since the ballot,was started no Minister Ivhb speaks about foreign .affairs fails to pay his tribute,to the League, If he is shy about the "League itself he calls it collective security." !■;:■•■' "A STAGE IN THE STRUGGLE." As to the future, the ballot was not an end in itself. It was 'just a stage in the struggle for peace. They must consolidate their gains, partly by using where they could the organisation of the National Declaration Committees, partly by strengthening the various permanent organisations such as -the League of Nations Union, for supporting peace t through, the League of Nations. ' :!':,: : ;. . "The first thing is to make sure that the, Government understand what has happened and then every member of Parliament and: every candidate for Parliament should be personally approached, each in/ his constituency, and Informed not.only how his electors had voted but' also what had happened all over the. country." • As a further explanation of the "astonishing success" of the • ballot Lord Cecil said: "The people are bored, with the ordinary clap-trap of party controversy, but they know well enough what peace means, and they care for it with every fibre of their being. They want from their Government a' full support of the League of Nations. They are sick of the old Power diplomacy—the jackboot and the mailed fist and the shining armour. To them all talk of that kind is the vapouring of an international bully; They insist that international quarrels shall be treated like those between individuals. Every effort should be made to reach a settlement by discussion above boardno half-clever diplomatic tricks, but plain and open discussion—and, if that fails, then an appeal must be made to world opinion and war must be prevented by the joint action of the whole civilised community. THE PRIMATE'S VIEWS. The Archbishop of Canterbury, describing the results of the ballot as most remarkable, said .it was the first time that on a scale so large the people of this country had been invited to express a free opinion. It was an intelligent opinion. Observing that the result was "a great and timely declaration by the British people of faith in the League of Nations," Dr. Lang said, "Crabbing the League has been a fashionable pursuit for some time. It has been open in certain sections of the Press. It has been very common on platforms, though thinly veiled by the lip service to the League. It has been only too common in private conversations, particularly in clubrooms, and the opinion of these wide-jninded citizens has been mainly shown by a shrug of the shoulders. But, indeed, in honesty, we must admit there were grounds for disquiet about the League. It can never be what was hoped as long as the Unij-ed States stands outside. There has been recently—l hope only temporarily—defection of Germany, and most sinister, when we consider the, problems of the Far East, the defection of Japan. These things make difficulties. "I hope this declaration Will encourage the Government to maintain not only in word, but constantly in deed, that the League is to be the keystone of its policy, and if it should be tempted to depart from that policy, then there are twelve millions of people in this country who will demand to know the reason why." This declaration is a great revelation of the ideals which are cherished by the great mass of the people of this country. I regard the vote as a welcome

breath from the high hills, where the ideals of a great people dwell." The Archbishop was careful to explain that the ballot did not mean a desire for unilateral disarmament on the part of Great Britain. Other speakers were Sir Walter Citrine, the Earl of Home, Mrs. Corbelt Ashby, Mrs. Pavett, Mr. W. J, Williams, and Dr. F. W. Norwood. THE RESOLUTION. The following resolution, moved by Lord Cecil, was carried:—1, This meeting, deeply impressed by the fact that through the national declaration nearly twelve millions of people have expressed by great majorities their desire for a policy of peace and disarmament through the League of Nations, calls upon the Government to carry out a definite and constructive policy on those lines, and accordingly requests the National Declaration Committee to take steps to bring before the Government and Parliament the detailed results of the ballot, and decides to take steps to strengthen the permanent organisations for peace throusi^'t the country. 2. This meeting warmly thanks the half-million ballot workers and the headquarters' staff for their energy and devotion, which have been so remarkable a feature of the work of the ballot and have so essentially contributed to its success. . The five questions on which the .public were asked to vote and the results were:— 1. Should Great Britain remain a member of the League of Nations? Yes, 11,157,040; no, 357,460; abstentions and doubtful, 113,265. 2. Are you in favour of ah all-round reduction of armaments by international agreement? Yes, 10,533,826; no, 1867,227; abstentions and doubtful, 226,712. " 3. Are you in favour of all-round abolition of national military and naval aircraft by international agreement? Yes, 9,592,573; no, 1,697,977; abstentions and doubtful, 337,215. 4; Should the manufacture and sale of armaments for private profit be prohibited by international agreement? Yes, 10,480,002; no, 779,513; abstentions and doubtful, 268,250. 5. Do you consider that, if a nation insists on attacking another, the other nations should combine to compel it to stop by (a) economic and non-mili-tary measures? Yes, 10,088,312; t no, 638,211; abstentions and doubtful, 901,242. (b) If necessary, military measures? Yes, 6,827,699; no, 2,364,279; abstentions and doubtful, 2,435,787. The total number of people over 18 able to vote—for everyone over 18, being of "military age," .was entitled to vote—was approximately 30,250,000. The votes recorded represent 38 per cent, of this number. ' *