NORWEGIAN NEGLIGENCE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 71, 21 February 1940, Page 9

NORWEGIAN NEGLIGENCE

PREMIER’S SHARP CRITICISM EXAMINATION OF ALTMARCK “ COMPLETE INDIFFERENCE ” (United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) (British Official "Wireless.) Received E e bra ary 21, 10.47 a.m. BUGrBY, Feb. 20. The Prime Minister (Mr Chamberlain), in the House of Commons, revealed that 299 officers and men were rescued from the Altmarck. They had been closely confined for periods up to more than three months. He felt bound to say that the account of the Norwegian Foreign Minister (Professor Koht) made the action, or rather inaction, of Norway even more difficult to understand than he had previously supposed. ‘•‘We had imagined the Norwegian authorities had conducted some examination of the Altmarck, and our complaint was that this examination had been so perfunctory that it did not reveal the presence of the British prisoners aboard, said Mr Chamberlain. “It now appears, however, that the Nor wegian authorities conducted no examination of the ship at all. I find it difficult in the circumstances to resist the conclusion that the Norwegian authorities displayed complete indifference t.s to the use which might be made of their territorial waters by the German fleet.” Mr Chamberlain’s statement was cheered 'on all sides of the House.

NO COMMUNICATION. Britain, Mr Chamberlain continued, had received no official communication apart from the original protest handed to Lord Halifax on Saturday, but all would probably have read the Press accounts showing Professor Koht’s statement. After briefly reviewing the incident leading to the rescue of the British prisoners as described in Professor Koht’s statement, Mr Chamberlain said it would be seen “that on not ono occasion, but on three or four, the Norwegian authorities failed to carry out a proper investigation of the case. It was not until after their refusals that His Majesty’s ships took action against the Altmarck, and it was plain if they had not done so the ship would have been allowed to complete her voyage to Germany without let or hindrance, and without any inquiry into the circumstances. “According to the views expressed by Professor Koht, Norway sees no objection to the use of Norwegian waters for hundreds of miles by a. German warship for the purpose of escaping capture on the high seas.” NAVY CONGRATULATED. Mr Chamberlain added that the Government was at present awaiting full reports from the naval officers concerned in the Altmarck incident, but he was sure the House would join with the Government in the satisfaction they leit at the release of the.officers and crews after their long ordeal and that members would desire to congratulate the Navy most heartily upon this notable addition to its annals. Referring to Norway’s attitude, he continued: ‘.‘Even the fact that the Norwegian authorities discovered that the Altmarck had used her wireless in Norwegian territorial waters, thus violating Norwegian regulations, did not lead the Norwegian authorities to take action beyond making a complaint and accepting an apology based on a statement by the Altmarck’s captain that he was not acquainted with the Norwegian prohibition. “Even if such indifference on the part of the Norwegian authorities were due to German pressure, it, nevertheless would be inconsistent with the active and impartial exercise of the duty of a neutral towards our6clves as belligerents. Norway’s doctrine would legalise abuse by German warships of neutral waters and create a position which Britain could under no circumstances accept.” Loud cheers punctuated the speech. Mr A. V. Alexander (Labour) said the Opposition were pleased with Mr Chamberlain’s statement and desired to associate themselves with the satisfaction at the Navy’s rescue of 300 men from durance vile. In the House of Lords Earl Stanhope issued a statement similar to i\ir Chamberlain’s.