Britain’s Attitude-To Bombing Of Ships: P.M’s Straight Talk

Northern Advocate, 14 July 1938, Page 7

Britain’s AttitudeTo Bombing Of Ships: P.M’s Straight Talk

(Received 1 p.m.)

RUGBY, July 13. IMPORTANT STATEMENT WAS MADE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMGNS BY MR CHAMBERLAIN REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS WITH BURGOS RESS’ECTING THE BOMBING OF BRITISH SHIPS.

Mr Chamberlain recalled that Br rebel authorities to explain the exact of any intention to make deliberate The reply, which had now been ships in Spanish ports were not delib Burgos claimed that bombing of these in arms, munitions, explosives and quayside, without discrimination as which it was. impossible for aircraft

itain had found it necessary to ask the meaning attached to its disclaimer attacks on British shipping. received, stated that attacks on British crate. In support of this statement ports was designed to prevent traffic war materials of all kinds at the to the respective national flag of ships, to distinguish.

At Own Risk. “The reply goes on to say that ships not engaged in contraband trade, which enter such dangerous zones, voluntarily expose themselves to the consequences of their own temerity, and it adds that attacks in which they are involved are not directed against them, but against objectives ; n the enemy port in which they lie. “This country passed legislation prohibiting British ships carrying arms to any port in Spain, and the Government has made it plain that it cannot accept legitimate bombing and sinking, by aircraft, of merchant shipping. At the same time, ships trading in the war zone must accept risks which are the inevitable, result of a state of war. Too Great Cost,

“Effective protection cannot be guaranteed then, unless this country is prepared to take an active part in the hostility. The Government, in our view, would not be justified in recommending such a course, which might result in a spread of the conflict far beyond its present limit, “While any military action in such a situation is precluded, the Government is not prepared to acquiesce in a repetition of attacks of a certain character.

“We have hitherto always made protests to Burgos where a vessel lies by itself, and, as such, has been subject to deliberate attack by low flying aircraft. An attack on an isolated vessel must, of its very nature, be deliberate, particularly in those circumstances where the vessel has been reconnoitred previously to the bombing, and has been machine-gunned afterwards. Almeria Not Acceptable. “The Government is still in communication with Burgos on this and other matters arising therefrom. It prefers to await the results of these communications before making any further statement. “With, regard to a safe port at Almeria, while appreciating that the suggestion was put forward with a view; to finding some solution to the present situation, the Government has found that the difficulties and disadr vantages of the proposals are very great, and have ascertained that the Spanish Government regards the pror posal as unacceptable. It is doubtful, therefore, whether it can be pro r ceeded with.

“I may add that Sir Robert Hodgson, British Agent at Burgos, is remaining in London for the time being.” Mr Attlee Presses a Point.

Mr C. R. Attlee, Labour leader, asked whether the Government was going to make it plain ,to Burgos that it could not accept an explanation which, seemed to be in the nature of a contradiction of the facts of the bombing that Mr Chamberlain had given to the House. Mr Chamberlain replied: “We have said.it is-not-possible to reconcile the disclaimer of a deliberate intention with the facts as known to us in certain particular cases. I would rather not make any further statement until communciations have proceeded a little further than they have at present,”