VIOLENT ATTACKS

Evening Star, Issue 23273, 23 May 1939, Page 11

VIOLENT ATTACKS

ON MR CHAMBERLAIN NAZIS AND PEACE FRONT The velvet glove with which Mr Chamberlain has hitherto been handled by the German Press has been whipped off overnight as a result of his speech at Birmingham'on Friday night, when he made it clear that Hitler has trifled with his engagements with Britain and Europe for the last time, said a Berlin message to the 1 Daily Telegraph and Morning Post ’ on March 19. During the week-end the newspapers of the Reich have been filled with vituperation against the world—and Britain in particular. A heavy banner headline in the ‘ National Zeitnng,’ of Essen, Field-Mar-shal Goering’s paper, proclaims; *‘ John Bull unmasked —Anglo-Saxon hypocrisy reaches its zenith—Roosevelt’s agitation bears fruit—England denounces Munich.”

The paper declares that the “ denunciation ” of the Munich declaration by the British Ambassador in Berlin, Sir Nevilo Henderson, is “ one of the most violent attacks on the good relations between the German and English peoples that has ever been made.” If this represented the views of the English people, “ Great Britain has declared herself the enemy of the German existence.” A DECISIVE POINT. Dr Silex, editor of the ‘ Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung,’ declares: “We are at a decisive point where England must decide whether she admits Germany’s Continental position or not. The tension is now so great that there is no avoiding the question whether England is for us or, against us, for or against our rights, for or against our Continental position.” After a lengthy dissertation, of the kind to which the readers of the German Press are now well accustomed, on Britain’s “ crimes ” regarding the .lameson raid, the Black and Tans, Amritsar, and the West Indies, Dr Silex resumes, “ Now that the challenge has gone forth, we, of course, take it un “ Chamberlain complains that he was not consulted, and bases his complaint on the Munich declaration of September 30. In this, however, questions ‘ which affect both our countries were mentioned. “ There could have beeu no more consultation about Czecho-Slovakia, since it had ceased to exist. What followed was no longer a question for Britain, but a vital one for Germany, which she solved directly, with the agreement of all concerned and by peaceful means. . “ If England is of another opinion that is an open admission of hostility towards the German Reich and its Conr tinental position.” In a leading article entitled 1 Answer to Chamberlain,’ the ‘ Boersen Zeitung,' after complaining that Mr Chamberlain spoke with a “ one-sided-ness which is incomprehensible and unforgivable,” goes on to accuse the Prime Minister of deliberate lying.

“ NO ATTENTION TO TRUTH.” “ We regret,” writes the paper with smug indignation, “to have to note that Mr Chamberlain did not pay any attention to the bounds set by love of truth.” This paper also devotes the usual paragraphs to the official_Gerraan version of the Boer War. Dr Rudolf Kircher, the influential editor of the ‘ Frankfurter Zeitung,' admits with astonishing frankness that “ Europe is in the grip of the most violent Machtpolitik.’ He reverts to the hackneyed “ argument,” so popular in Germany under Wilhelm 11.. that Germany is surrounded by wicked enemies who wish to “ hem in her vital space.” He concludes by saying > that the “ FrancoItalian question is to-day a central problem for Europe.” The ‘ Lokalanzeiger,’ announcing ” Chamberlain oils the agitation machine.” also speaks of total encirclement.” Mr Chamberlain, the paper adds, is in clanger of becoming “ the European Roosevelt.” The question of Czecho-Slovakia was purely one for Germany. who had. therefore, not abandoned the Munich declaration in omit- , ting to consult Britain.