CONTRABAND CONTROL

Greymouth Evening Star, 20 September 1939, Page 8

CONTRABAND CONTROL

GERMAN THREAT TO NEUTRALS. [BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS,] RUGBY, September 19. The Belgian Press has reproduced the following bulletin issued by the “Deutsche Nachricliten Buro”: “Great Britain is mistaken if she thinks Germany is disposed to allow her communications with neutral States to be cut by British guns. We must warn these States not to submit to Britain, This warning is specially addressed to the Oslo States, which met at Copenhagen on September 18. “Germany desires to leave neutrals outside the present conflict. This desire must not, however, be considered as weakness, Germany not being disposed to allow the least deviation from neutrality, even if it is. a question of yielding to force.” This can be seen to contain a direct threat to neutral States, to force them to conform to Germany’s own ideas of neutral conduct. The British Government’s attitude toward the question of trade with neutrals has been made clear in the statement issued by the Ministry of Information. If that attitude has produced this violent reaction in Germany, it is clearly because she, notoriously, depends to a large extent on the Scandinavian States for war materials, and wishes to force them to continue to supply her with these, though, in international law, no neutral Sfate is under any obligation to supply anything to belligerents, unless she feels so disposed. . Such threats are the more remarkable, in view of the German Government’s declared intention to impose, a contraband control of its own on neutral shipping.

BRITAIN AND NEUTRALS. LONDON, September 19. A Ministry of Information communique states that Britain has informed neutrals that she is ready to consider at all times their suggestions. Discussions are proceeding in a most friendly manner. Britain will continue every effort to take into account the trading needs of neutrals. NAZI ALLEGATIONS DENIED. RUGBY, September 19. 'A recent German communique asserted that the British Government had addressed notes to neutral Governments, especially to those in the Oslo group, showing determination to ride roughshod over the latters’ vital interests and rights as neutrals. It was alleged that the British notes put forward a number of demands, and stated that non-compliance on the part of neutral Governments would be regarded as a breach of neutrality. These allegations have now been categorically denied by the Danish, Swedish, Norwegian and' Finnish Governments, who have issued a statement that no such note was received by any of these Govf.>rnments.