IF WAR BREAKS OUT

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 14 September 1935, Page 8

IF WAR BREAKS OUT

DOMINION’S OBLIGATIONS

CRITICISM OF THE LEAGUE. “ABSOLUTE ILLUSION.” (By Telegraph—Press Association.! WELLINGTON, Sept. 13. He did not think Hew Zealand was much interested in Italy’s African policy, and he thought New Zealand would he well advised to he hegged to he excused, said the Hon. W. H. Mclntyre during the Address-in-Reply dehate in the Legislative Council to-day. He did not know why one man should he sent to fight to preserve the League of Nations, which was an absolute illusion. His sympathies were with Italy, which should have the right to endeavour to develop a country which was undeveloped and which the people who were occupying it would never develop, added Mr Mclntyre. Similar arguments against Italy’s intentions could he used against the British coming to New Zealand. The Hon. W. Perry referred to New Zealand’s obligations under the League Covenant and to the treaties tyy which New Zealand was bound in relation 'with the other nations. Should the League collapse an institution based on the hopes and prayers of millions of people would fall. There were two schools of thought about the League, one believing that the League was merely a conciliatory body, never resorting to force, and the other school thought that war could not be avoided unless the would-be aggressor was restrained by force used against him. Mr Perry said he belonged most emphatically to the latter school, and he was supported in his view by the Archbishop of York.

The Hon. P. Waite: What if the other nations do not join? Mr Perry: Then’l should certainly not suggest that Britain should be the world’s policeman alone. The Archbishop had made the statement subject to the condition that all should join in. It was the duty of the members of the League to enforce the Covenant of the League at whatever cost. MUST MAKE SACRIFICES. “If we desire peace,” said Mr Perry, “we must be prepared to make sacrifices to obtain peace.” lie said history had shown tfiat peace had never been brought about by moral suasion. He strongly attacked the pacifists and said there seemed to be a division of opinion among the members of the League Union in New Zealand. The Dominion was bound by all the obligations of the Covenant, and it was its duty to provide its share of the force necessary to enforce the Covenant, assuming that alb the signatories to the Covenant agreed to enforce sanctions. Signor Mussolini desired the expansion of Italy, but had this position arisen in 1913, when Britain had a twoPower navy/ Britain would have said “Hands Off Abyssinia!” and Italy would have accepted that. Britain had almost thrown away its birthright by disarming, and it was doubtful whether its voice now counted for much in the councils of the nations.

Mr Perry also criticised Christian pacifists who belonged to the No More War Movement. The doctrine of Christian pacifism, he said, was subversive to a free democracy such as New Zealand. If the League failed the race for armaments would be intensified. Ho stressed the urgent need for adequate naval and military defence in New Zealand, The Hon. E. MeCallum in the debate yesterday also referred to the Abyssinian position. lie said that as a member of the League of Nations Abyssinia had a right to bo fairly dealt with. The Prime Minister had been taken to task for saying that, when Britain was at war New Zealand, was at war, but he was of the opinion that every member of the Council and the House should uphold Mr Forbes’ view and let Britain know that the Prime Minister was supported. There was some question as to what Mr Forbes had said, but he himself saw no reason why the Prime Minister should go back on the statement made in Canada. There was no need to call Parliament together in the event of war, as Mr Forbes could .communicate with all members in two or three hours and obtain their views. The proposal to take a plebiscite was the sheet anchor of a shuffler.

SUPPORT OF BRITAIN. lie ventured the opinion that the great majority of the constituents would strongly support the Government in telling the British Government that New Zealand heart and soul was with it. New Zealand should stand with the British Government, first for sentimental reasons. He contended that New Zealand had almost been spoonfed by England, and over-kindness did not always breed the right spirit. From a trade point of view Britain's ports had always 'been open, but had New Zealand reciprocated? Britain had never put a levy on imports from New Zealand, which had borrowed extensively- from Britain. Healing with Britain ’s policy Mr McCallunx said that as honest men they had to say that the Empire Government was bound to the League of Nations. Italy’s policy might be a gigantic bluff, but he could not conceive war if all members of the League were not agreeable. Supplies could be cancelled, but in the final result a few ships of war supplied by different na-

tions could blow the Italian Navy to smithereens', and without -a navy where would Italy be, with her coastline unprotected and the country easily invaded? There was no reason why the example of the United .States should not be taken and a federated Europe come into being. The lion. L. M. Isitt said lie had always been a strong pacifist. The onlyexcuse for war was for defence or for the protection of those being ill-treat-ed. While a strong pacifist lie was not an insane (pacifist, and unfortunately there were 100 many insane pacifists, lie was sorry he was able to identify 7 some with the Christian Church.. They were wrong from a theological standpoint. Pacifists had no right to encurage the attack of an enemy by advertising to the world. The Hon. W. W. Snodgrass said that Italy and Abyssinia should be prepared to accept the League’s ruling. There was no doubt that the people of New Zealand, as the Prime Minister had said, would be behind the British Government in any steps taken.