THE SOVIET.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 11 April 1927, Page 5

THE SOVIET.

R UMOURE D INSURR ECTION. BY CABLE—PEESS ASSOCIATION—COPYEIGHT. LONDON, April 8. A curious message from Angora states that active revolt has broken out in Russia against Soviet rule. Details are lacking, but it is confirmed that the movement is monarchical.

The reports mention anti-Bolshevik risings in the Ukraine and other provinces daily. The “News’s’’ Constantinople correspondent states that troops were sent against the insurgents, and fierce encounters occurred in several districts, with heavy casualties.

RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND. STRAINED, BUT NOT BROKEN. lest peace be impossible. RUGBY, April S. At a meeting in his Birmingham constituency yesterday the Foieign Secretary, Sir Austen Chamberlain, tie. scribed British relations with the •Soviet Government, as difficult. The Soviet, lie said, made no secret of its desire to promote revolution in every part of the world. They regarded the British Empire with particular animosity and jealousy, because of the common sense of its people, and because of the freedom of its institutions, which were a. reproach to the tyrannies exercised m Russia, and were a, buttress against the spread of the revolution which the Soviet would promote. The Soviet worked: through the Communist International and other sources to foster 111-feeling against Great Britain and the Empire. With such provocation the British Government had a clear right before the whole world to decline to entertain any longer diplomatic relations with a government which had little regard for the obligations of international life. If it had not done it, Sir Austen Chamberlain continued, it was not because we were unaware of the piovocation or unaware of the policy they were pursuing; it was liecau.se in a. world, which above all tilings needed pence, wo were disinclined, even under such provocation, to introduce a new disturbing element, not so much on account of our own situation, for we could break off these diplomatic relations without it costing us as a nation anything, but because any now disturbance in the world reacted more strongly on other nations, whose position was less stable and less assured than our own. This was not a mark of weakness, but rather of strength, and of our confidence in ourselves, that- we could afford to pass over an outrage which no government had the right to inflict on another government with which it wished to remain in ordinary diplomatic relations. But while we might for these international reasons, and in the larger interest of the peace of the world, still tolerate this outrageous conduct, it was necessary to watch closely those who would bring ruin upon Britain.