PEACE PROPOSALS

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 December 1940, Page 7

PEACE PROPOSALS

DISCUSSION IN COMMONS JUSTICE v. ANARCHY [BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS,] RUGBY, December 5. The Commons debated the Independent Labour Party’s amendment to the King’s Speech, regretting that “the Government has failed to set forth the terms upon which peace might be made,” and suggesting the calling of a conference, by means of which “the war might be brought to an early conclusion.” Mr McGovern, in moving the amendment, said that a growing number of British people believed that the conflict should be ended, and could be ended, if reason were allowed to supersede brute force. If Hitler made a speech in the Reichstag Mr Churchill .should make - reasoned reply in the Commons, plying Hitler with questions as to what kind of world he envisaged after the war, and what he intended to do in certain countries which to-day were under Nazi domination. In seconding the amendment, Mr Campbell-Stephen said that the Independent Labour Party, just as the members of other parties, dreaded •the possibility of a German victory. The time had come when Britain should make a great moral gesture to the world, and offer peace to the other side, on the basis of justice to all people, and thus give hope to the great mass of workers in every country. The first speaker to oppose the amendment was Mr James Griffiths, (Labour), who citing as an example Marshal Petain’s actions, said that the question before Britain was not peace or war. but capituation or survival.

Sir Percy Harris (Liberal) also opposed the amendment. Mr James Walker (Labour) said that if the amendment had been put before { he National Labour Conference, it would have been overwhelmingly defeated. Winding up the debate in favour of the amendment, Mr Maxton said that the majority of the people in the world desired peace.

MR. ATTLEE’S REVIEW. Mr. Attlee asked those supporting the amendment whether they favoured peace at any price, or whether they believed in liberty and social justice. If Hitler refused to listen to what they called a point of reason, and rejected a plea for liberty and social justice, put forward by the supporters of the amendment, would they fight, or give way? Mr. Attlee asked. He added that he had great respect ..for those who hold absolute pacifist views, and spoke of the work done by the late Mr. George Lansbury. “There is no one in the House who is not impressed by the horror of this war, or the sight of mangled bodies and broken homes, but there is something worse than the killing of the body, and that is the killing of the soul.” Mr. Attlee referred to the great tragedy of a great and talented race, whose young men had been trained to go back to barbarism. “A great many of the German people have been corrupted by this abominable dictator'ship. Hitler has this grip on Europe find his people, and it is not going to be loosened by a few nice words from the supporters of this amendment.” The ideals for which Hitler and Mussolini stood were not those of highly-civilised human beings. The great difficulty confronting the Government was that Britain was up 'against people who would not accept the beginning of the foundations of the decencies of modern civilisation. The House must realise that the present war was a contest between two different conceptions of how affairs should be carried on. The Fascists and Nazis had destroyed every vestige of freedom in Europe. The British aim was to try to establish a world peace of free people, a peace such as civilised people understood. What Britain was asking for herself, she was asking for other nations. It was not an occasion when the Government should be expected to give a detailed exposition of war aims. The King, in his speech, said, “We are resolved to continue the fight until liberty and social justice is secured.” There was no order or authority, and no social justice on the Continent of Europe today. Britain had got to replace anarchy in the world. The amendment was rejected by 341 votes to four.

ITALIAN PRESS COMMENT. (Received December 6, 9.5 a.m.) LONDON, December 5. Reuter’s Rome- correspondent quotes “11 Messagero” as saying: Mr. Churchill’s refusal to consider a Christmas truce is a surprise to nobody. He would never agree to such a proposal from the Pope, because he is a pure representative of that Protestant faith which, more than any other, is under Hebraic influence, and is marked by fierce opposition to the Catholic Church. Hatred against Rome is stronger in England than human consideration or religious sentiment.

AUSTRALIAN SHIPPING. (Received December 6, 9.5 a.m.) CANBERRA, December 5. Sir Earle Page, Minister of Commerce announced that the Government had placed him in control of Australian coastal shipping. He said that certain recent events, such as. the sinking of ships in Bass Strait, had caused a great accumulation of cargo, with the result that he would confer with the Shipowners’ Federation, to decide upon measures to deal with the situation. Vessels under 100 tons would not be affected.

GOLD CONSIGNMENT. (Received December 6, 9 a.m.) LISBON, December 5. A steamer, carrying a large consignment of gold for British purchases in the United States, has arrived in the Tagus, after a voyage of 28 days. A zig-zagging course was necessary, to . escape Italian and German submarines. Some were narrowly eluded.