ZINOVIEFF LETTER

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 24 November 1924, Page 5

ZINOVIEFF LETTER

LONDON PAPER'S COMMENT (By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) (Australian and jS./j. Cable Association) LONDON, Nov. 22 The Daily Herald, commenting on the Note to the Soviet, says that tho Government is anxious to hush up tho Zino\ieff letter, but the Labour Party will insist upon complete clearing up of its mysteries and exposure of a fraud whereby the election was won at the price of provoking an international crisis. FOREIGN OFFICE NOTE LONDON, Nov. 22. The Foreign Oftico in n Note to Rakovsky states that after due deliberation ,'iis Majesty's Government is unable, to recommend that the treaties signed on Bth August 'to the consideration of Parliament; or to submit thorn to the King for ratification. A separate note to Rakovsky regarding the Zinovieft' letter states that Rakovsky undertook to declare, apparently upon internal evidence alone and without allowing time for reference to Moscow, that the Zinovieff letter was a £>'o6s forgery. Mr Chamberlain says His Majesty's Government cannot accept Rakovsky's assertions, which are disproved by reference to official publications and the Soviet press. The Xote continues: "But it is unnecessai'v to enter into details, because the information in possession of His Majesty :; Government leaves no doubt in their minds of the authenticity of the Zinovieft' letter. Therefore they are rot prepared to discuss the matter. You misapprehend the character of the representations of my predecessors if juu supposed they dealt- with Zinovicffs letter only. The activities of which Fig Majesty's Government complain are not confined to the particular letter, but extend to the whole body of revolutionary propaganda, of which the 'ett.er is a fair specimen, which is sometimes conducted secretly and sometimes, as you rightly remark, is unconcealed. The pronouncements of Zinovieff broadcasted throughout the world are in themselves sufficient evidence of the propaganda in which the Third International, wit!- the knowledge of the Soviet Gov.'f iinent, continually indulges, and this system, in the view of His Majesty's Government. is inconsistent with the solemn under takings of your Government in the note of 26th October to Mr MacDonald."

Mr Chamberlain observes that nobody who understands the constitution and relationship of the Communist International will doubt its intimate connection and contact with the Soviet Go vernment. He further obser "es that “No Government can ever tolerate an arrangement with a foreign government, whereby the latter is in formal diplomatic relations of the correct kind with it, whilst at the same time a propagandist, body organically connected with that foreign government encourages, and tven orders subjects of the former to plot and plan revolutions' for its overthrow. This is true, and the Soviet Government will do well to weigh carefully the consequences of ignoring this pronounce-’ ment.”