BRITAIN’S LOSSES

Grey River Argus, 19 April 1929, Page 5

BRITAIN’S LOSSES

f ON WAR DEBTS LABOUR PROTEST Derived by Tories IN WHOSE INTEREST? (Australian & N.Z. Gable Awn.) LONDON. April 17. There was remarkable interest in the Commons debate as the outcome of Mr Snowden’s declaration in his yes terday’s Budget speech regarding the Balfour Notq, which Note pledged Britain to exact no more from her debtors in Europe than is required to pay Britain’s debt to America. Mr Snowden, in his speech, declared: * ‘Wo (th? Labour Parry) have never subscribed to the policy of the Balfour Note. I think that it was infamous, and we hold ourselves open, if circumstances arise, to repudiate the conditions of that Note.” Interrupting Mr Snow den (who was the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the MacDonald Labour Mr Churchill (Chancellor of Exchequer) said the Balfour Note embodied agreements with France and Italy. It was a dangerous thing lor a possible future Minister to use th< Word “repudiation” in this connection.

Mr Snowden denied that an agree ment made by one Government bound every succeeding Government. TORY ELECTION STUNT. After Mr Snowden’s remarks, there Was much speculation in the lobbies as t 0 the possible effect. Members on both sides assume that a new definite election issue has suddenly arisen. The Labourites retort that the Government is deliberately casting about for an “elec ion stunt.” J<r Snowden, in a reply to the Government Front Bench condemnation, adhered to the original declaration, but his reply is regarded to have wat ered down somewhat his peroration. ' Irrevocably Committed

MR CHURCHILL’S CLAIM FOR THE . NOTE. . - (United Service). Mi LONDON,’ April 17. 11 Vchurehill, speaking on the Balfour Note in the Budget debate, said: That Note has been the foundation of the recent relations of Britain with the Governments of Europe, and has been the underlying principle of every step taken to place the affairs of Europe on a more peaceful and a more sqlid basis. The principle of the Note Zs recognised by the reparations exfports, who are at present sitting in Paris. Mr Snowden has claimed that Labour represents peace and the tjue spirit, of the League of Nations; yet now he has deliberately said that Labour bolds itself free to repudiate these agreements with France and Italy in order to extract larger sums from them. He has used the term “bilking,” a slang expression, from the gutter, to convey hatred and contempt for a nation with which we have the closest and most intimate personal re lations.” Mr Churchill added: “Mr Ramsay MacDonald ha s played a distinguished part in the appeasement of Europe, hopes to be again entrusted with For the sake of European iJmQi I appeal to him to give a more loyal and a more fatbful answer to the question put. to him than Mr Snowden has given.”

THE GOVERNMENT REPLY. SIXTY-TWO YEARS OF INDEMNITIES! 1 ’ RUGBY, April 17. In the course of the debate on the budget. Sir L. Worthing'on Evans (War Minister) replied to the attack made yesterday by Mr Snowden upon ( the Allied debt settlements. Regarding the figures quoted by Mr Snowden, purporting to show that the United S ates had extracted from France and Italy better terms than Britain had, Sir L. Worthington Evans pointed out that these were merely lump sums, the total of all an ttual payments to be made year by year, over a period of 62 years, with out any regard for the time of pay ment. Sir L. Worthington Evans continued: “Now I come to the most serious aspect of Mr Snowden’s speech., and I want t» be very careful t 0 pick my words. We were all greatly surprised R nd startled yesterday by the statement which Mr Snowden made that lie and his party would, if returned to power, hold themselves free to icpudi ate the fundamental principles of the Balfour Note, namely, that, Great Britain should take no more from Europe by way of debt and n pnrations than She requires to pay her own obi. gations to the United States. lint principle has been for seven years th ■ foundation of the treatment o European debt problems by every (.over., ' me at that has held office here. It

would surely be a wanton and racklcs act, in no way called for by anything that has occurred, for Mr Snowden Ind his Party now to threaten to repudiate the principle upon which every forward step towards European recon atruction and peace has been taken If such a declaration were “ and Europe were led to believe that the policy aimed at WaS ? " ’ payments of debts and repara 1 a r were required for ou r pay nts to the United States, the utmost Interests, but the wider interests I Of fe°bMieve<l L that Mr Ramsay Mac ■ XVr he accepted and endorsed the of Mr Snowden, and if »

constituted the official policy of the Labour Party. SNOWDEN STANDS HIS GROUND. Mr Snowden, rising, said he was surprised that any observations of his should be the subject for Cabinet discussion.. and of a Cabinet memorandum being presented to that House. He ad ded: “I decline to make any apology for what I said yesterday. T don’ intend to withdraw a single word of it. I must express my surprise at. the prominence and attention that has been given to my remarks, for it was by no means the first time I have made that s atement in the House of Coin mon s. ’ ’ Tie continued that the policy of the Labour Party regarding debt settlement had often been stated. It was that they would favour an All-round Cancellation of debts and repara ions, and that policy was enunciated also in th" I concluding sentences of Lord Bal four’s memorandum, which he pro ceeded to quote. Jt was not that part of the Balfour Not© that he attacked yesterday. It was to the o her part, •f the Note, that if the all-round cancellation could not be secured, we should put a burden on ourselves for the benefit of ou r Continental hours, that Labour now opposed arid always had opposed.

The Labour Party had been taunted wi h being friends of every country but their own. “I am sufficient of an Englishman,” declared Mr Snowden, “not to be content to see my country and my people bled white, for the ben efit of other countries, who are fa* more prosperous than ourselve’’.” He recalled the words h e used yes terday. and asserted there was not a word there abou? repudiation of debt As to tuc circumstances, which were likely to arise when they would hold themselves open to repudiate the con ditions of the Balfour Note, did the Government think the present conditions in regard to interna ions debt and reparations were likely to be permanent? Was there any man who thought the debt agreements which had been niade ; were going to remain in force without change and without modification

For the Next Sixty Years? The Expert Committee were sitting in Paris, and he contended that thej* wer© just as much concerned with the question of inter-Allied debts as with the question of reparations. He made his statement on the previous night on the spur of the moment. It was not a considered statement at all. and if he had had time to prepare the statement he did not think he could have improved on that which he had made. Was. it not a common prac tice, an almost daily practice of Foreign Office, to ©nter into •communication with foreign governments regarding revision and hinetidmeut of treaties which had been found tb inflict hardship, and was the practice of denouncing treaties altogether unknown? It was perfectly absurd Id* say that an agreement entered into by one Gov e rumen t should be binding on future Governments to accept, and never to say that by negotiations it could be changed. That was what be meant when he said that if circums ances arose when the Labour Party was in office, and the question of amen’’' ment or revision of Allied debts arose, then they would consider themselves free to enter into negotiations to revise the Balfour Note.

SHOULD EUROPE PAY MORE? Mr Churchill, following Mr Snow den said the country and ihc world had th e right to know Labour’s official view of the State’s plighted obliga lions. M r> Snowden had said that Labour favoured the cancellation of all debts. How could he reconcile that with the strident asser.ion that 'if he had the powes, he would insis f on reclaiming more from ruined Europe than we had agreed to pay the United States. That was. the point with which the Government asked Mr MacDonald to deal. Ever since the Balfour Note- had been written, Britain had been al lo to go to any international gathering with clean hand and conscience. . MACDONALD NOT BUDGING EITHER.

M r Mac-Donald supported Mr Snow den. declaring that he merely enun iciated th e policy laid down by Labour dn 1923, t 0 the effect that Englan I should adopl a generous attitude regarding the settlement of Allied debts. “That,” said Mr MacDonald, “is La bout’s policy up till to-day.” The Daily Herald (Labour) editorially states: The question must one day be reopened. If Mr Snowden made that plain, he performed an interna tional service. TORY TUB-THUMPING. M r MacDonald. Leader of the Op position, said that he would deal with the general subject later on. In the meantime, he hoped that the Minister ialists would not descend to tubthumping humbug about it. Mr Chu” ehill, he said, had deliberately encouraged bad blood, and bad made thingmore difficult, in order to make a mere electioneering point. foreign secretary speaks sir Austen Chamberlain said that the Balfour Note had for seven years been before th e world as a.i explicit statement of the British policy on th’ subject of the Allied debts. Mr Snowden had described as “infamou.” this declaration that Britain should ask no more from her Allies and from her

enemies together than she was requited to pay to the United States. Sir Aufeten Chamberlain said: “This is the basis of the financial reconstruction of Europe, and the. basis of the political reconstruction of peace. This is not a question for tub-thumping. I am not going to use the language of the street corner. I say deliberately, as Foreign Secretary, that no worse day’s work has been done in any Parliament, and no greater setback has been caused t 0 the progress we have already accomplished, or hope to accomplish during the next few months, than Mr Snowden’s rash words. I beg Mr MacDonald, who has held office, and who knows the difficulties and delicacies of the situation, to speak before the end of the debate some words o f reassurement to the world—to teij them that, whatever Faitj u

in office, England will keep her word, so that the world may continue, to have faith in our good name.” LIBERAL PARTY ATTITUDE. Right Hon W. C. Run ciman (formerly Liberal Financial Secretary to the Treasury) said that he did not desire to comment on the agreements. He wished only t 0 make it clear, as far as he Liberals were concerned, that they would not depart from the doctrine of continuity of contractual international o bligations. R;gh.t Hon W. Graham (Labour) ask •d could any impartial member of the House of Commons believe that the Balfoiij. Note was the beginning and the end of the debts arrangements. If he said, so large a part of the indu? try of Europe, and particularly that of Britain, was going to struggle, vis a-vis to the United .States for the whole of the remainder of this century, then no party should close the door against the cancellation of th? inter-Allied debts, however difficult might bo its attainment.

LABOUR STANDS BY AGREEMENT Mr Ramsay MacDonald, rising later amidst wild Labour cheering, said that both Mr Snowden and Mr J. H. Tho mas were given to the habit of taking adjectives'from the mustard pot. Some of Mr Snowden’s seemed t 0 have developed into high party politics, and, as a result, Mr W. I’. Runciman had felt culled on to stand up, as white as a sheet, and to say: “Please, we do not belong to the c e publicans!” He hoped that this matter was not going to be made another stunt—as he presumed that Air Churchill was trying to make it. There was the accusation that if Labour were elected to cffice it would not honour Britain’s signature. None, he declared, knew bet ter than did Sir Austen Chamberlain how little substance was in that sug gestion. Sir Austen Chamberlain: “I did not make any suggestion against you, but it is only an inference from Air Snowden’s words.”

Mr MacDonald said that this sug gestion was a gross injury and an injustice to the Labou r Party. If the Government wanted to make it a party cry it was welcome to du ao. There never had been any question of Labour repudiating any agreements except by a negotiated revision of them. Air Churchill, intervening, said that he was pleased that Mr MacDonald had repudiated Air Snowden’s s atement. Air AlncDonald: “What Mr Snowden aid was that agreements were not ‘sacred against revision! The Government has n 0 right to go to the country on untrue statements. So long as I am the Labour Leader, there will be no repudiation! All that is in Mr Snowden’s mind is whether the condi tions of the Balfour Note,, when con sidered as a hard-headed business pro position, are not rather inimical to England. Labour’s position has been laid down mo t clearly again and

again.” Air MacDonald added that the Lab our Party, at its conference in 1923.) adopted the following resolution “This conference renews its repeated declaration that this country should adopt a generous attitude in the mat ter of the settlement of the Allied debts, as part of the general settlement of the Reparations problem.” “That.” declared Air MacDonald, “is the policy of the Party up till to-day. I said till to-day—not till yesterday' It will continue to be the policy ol Labour after the election.” WINSTON’S GALLERY PLAY. Air Churchill, in replying to the de bate, said that he-had hoped that Mr Snowden on the previous day was on ly guilty of inadvertence. Yet today he had reiterated his remarks deliberately. The point at issue was whether Labour accepted the view that agreements concluded by one Government bound its successors. He understood that Air AfacDonald completely dissociated the Labour Party from Mr Snowden’s rejection of this principle Labourite: “No!” Air Churchill: “It is so, isn’t it? The House should insist on an auMr MacDonald did not attempt to reply. Mr Churchill asked a second tune:’ “Does Labour accept the Balfour Note principle that we should not take from Europe more than we pay the United States?” Mr MacDjpnald remained in his seat. Mr Churchill: “We have come to this. Mr MacDonald does not dare to rise and reply. I commend to the country’s attention the fact that the Labour Leader does not dare to an swer a plain, simple question.” A Labourite: “Mussolini!” Mr Churchill: “He sits there. He does not dare to open his mouth.” Th e Budget resolutions were carried without a division.

A TOBY LEADER’S 'HEROICS. LONDON, April 17. Speaking at Glasgow, Sir Robert Horne (ex-Chancellor) vigorously replying to Mr Snowden’s, speech of last -light regarding Britain’s debt polity, aid that Mr Snowden’s proposals embodied not only the ruin of the reputation of Britain for keeping ba ’’g al “ B but at the present moment would have the effect of upsetting the whole finals rial arrangement in Europe, a id raigh. cause . serious crisis in Britain s £ lations with other countries. It Mr Snowden was to be believed. tlr. Labourites were ready the principles on which Britain fin ancial relations with the Allies were established, to rip up her ag^ e “®“ ’ and start a new earee t as Europe Shylock.

Anti-Labour Press HOPES FOR ELECTIONEERING CRY. ((Received lO 55 p.mO A LONDON, April 18. The ‘“Daily Telegraph” says: Ordnion in the lobby at a late hour test night was that the matter can not\n g view of Mr . Soden’s insistence, be allowed to rest whe# it L. S ha "Morning Post’s”

writer says: “During the dinner hour the Labour Executive camp Lo the decision it must support Air Snowden, though it was agreed that he had been indiscreet. Accordingly, the Cabour Election attitude will be that the Government has made bad debt bargains, and especially those with Italy and France. Therefore, as soon as they eomM into power, they wiki endeavour to revise these agreements. The Ministeralists arc <!-*•

lighted to hear iof this decision. The Conservatives an! the Liberals will both tight for the honouring of pledges that werb given in the name of Britain.” ANOTHER TORY CRITICISM. The “Times’s” political writer says* “The general feeling aft a- Mr MacDonald’s speech was that he had taken the only possible course in throwing Mr Snowden overboard. Air MacDonald had earlier consulted th' t Labour Party Executive for it was obvious that matters would have to be smocked out if Air Snowden’s indiscretion was not to lead tp an electoral disaster in May. Mr MacDonald’s subsequent assuraneJ that, in spite of Mr Snowden’s wild words, ther e would be no repudiation somewhat cleared the air, but the general fedling was that Mr Snowdtn could not havrr been more indiscreet at a more unfortunate moment.” “CA’ CANNY” IN FRANCE. LONDON. April 17. TJiough the original statement was given prominence in the French press, there is little comment. “L’ Information” says it is persuaded that even if Air Snowden again heads the Trea sury, his. viewpoint as Oppositionist will immedialely be transformed into that of a member of His Alajesty’s Government. The official French view is likewise restrained.