LEAGUE COUNCIL

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXVI, 19 December 1935, Page 7

LEAGUE COUNCIL

PARIS PEACE PROPOSALS SPIRIT IN WHICH THEY WERE MADE TO ASCERTAIN VIEWS OF THREE PARTIES SPEECHES BY MR EDEN AND M.LAVAL (British Official Wireless) (Received 19th December, 11.40 a.m.) RUGBY, 18th December. Tlie Council of the League of Nations met at Geneva this morning, but the Italo-Abyssiuian question will not be discussed until this afternoon’s session. Mr Eden and M. Laval, who travelled by tlie same train to Geneva, did not attend the morning session of the Council, but met privately to discuss the attitude to be taken at this afternoon s debate. The League Council met in public session this evening. At the outset tributes were paid to M. Belies, who was to-day sworn in as president of the Czechoslovakia Republic. Mr Eden recalled the approval given by the Co-ordination Committee to the attempts to find a basis of discussion between Ethiopia and Italy, leading to efforts of the French and British Governments to find such a basis, culminating in the Paris proposals. Mr Eden said: — , “It lias been in the minds of the two Governments as an essential condition that before finally pressing any terms settlement upon tlie parties those terms should be approved bv the League of Nations, for members of the League are bound to respect and to do their utmost to apply the Covenant. It was not an easy task which the two Governments undertook, and it may well be maintained it has been at the present juncture of events an almost impossible task. It was proper that an attempt should be made, however. For that I make no apologies. Even if this attempt is to be unsuccessful the essential aim of conciliation remains, as the League has frequently recognised, the principle. It must be emphasised that the Paris proposals were not advanced as proposals to be insisted on in any event. They were advanced in order to ascertain what the views of the three parties might be upon them, and the British Government recommended them only for this purpose.

“If, therefore, it transpires that these proposals which are now before you do not represent the essential conditions of agreement by the three parties, the British Government could not continue to recommend or support them. In their minds this particular attempt at a solution would not have been regarded as having achieved its object, and they for their part would not wish to pursue it further.” Mr Eden was followed by M. Laval, who endorsed -the former’s account of the spirit in which the proposals were made. M. Laval continued : .“We still do not know the reception which the other two parties will give to our suggestions, and I suggest during this wait that the Council itself will desire to avoid making a definite decision. Nevertheless, I esteem it my duty to declare at this time that if these attempts do not meet with the assent of all interested parties tlie Council will have to make up its mind not to neglect any means to find'a peaceful sttlement for the present conflict, a solution which will be honest and one which lias as its basis the peace of tlie world.

IN THE SPIRIT OF THE COVENANT The only other speaker before the Council adjourned was the Ethiopian representative,, Mr Wolde Marian, who said Abyssinia had put its case before the League and trusted it would settle the conflict in accordance with the pnnciple and spirit of the Covenant, ine Covenant must be respected. Abyssinia could not accept a peace of capitulation or spoilation. She asked for the juagment of the League Assembly, but would respect the decision of the CounThe Italian member of the, Council did not attend the session. The President adjourned tlie Council, saying that long as the attitude of Italy and Abyssinia remained undefined members would doubtless prefer to examine the question at another sitting. Geneva press messages suggest that the Council may meet in private tomorrow and in public on Friday. REGARDED AS DEAD The speeches of Mr Eden and M. Laval at Geneva are regarded as ad= missions that the peace plan is dead. Mr Eden said: “If either Italy. Abyssinia or the League reject the plan Britain will not pursue it further.”

PRIVATE MEETING HELD ATMOSPHERE OF SUPPRESSED EXCITEMENT ITALIAN DELEGATE WITHDRAWS (Received 19th December, 10.40 a.m.) GENEVA, 18th _ December. _ The League Council met privately in an atmosphere of suppressed excitement, and waited fifteen minutes while the Italian delegate sought instructions from Rome (Whether to sit at the table. As none arrived he withdrew^ The Council then merely adopted the report of the Committee recommending the settlement of Assyrian refugees in Syria. The Ethiopian delegates handed the Secretariat a long note showing that tlie Hoare-Laval terms were impossible from the viewpoint of Ethiopia.

LABOUR’S MOTION TO BE REGARDED AS VOTE OF CENSURE AMENDMENT BY CONSERVATIVES (British Official Wireless; ' (Received 19tb December, 11.40 a.m.) RUGBY, 18lh December. It is understood the Government will regard the Labour Opposition’s motion upon which the debate in the House ot Commons will be raised on Thursday as a vote of censure, which will be resisted to the fullest extent. In view of the current division of opinion among Government followers interest attaches to the terms of the amendment which was handed in last night by several younger Government supporters, and which is in tlie following terms. This House, recognising that, the proposals set out in the White Paper for a settlement of the Italo-Ethio-pian dispute are unacceptable, urges his Majesty's Ministers to resume the policy outlined in September by the Foreign Secretary at Geneva, and overwhelmingly endorsed by the country at the recent general election. “The Times” says if it is possible to

i press this amendment to a division it I will be carried by a large majority, tor it undoubtedly represents the sentiments of tlie Commons as a whole.

The "Daily Telegraph” however, says tlie forms of procedure of the House may be held to render impossible the moving of a reasoned amendment oil ! these lines on a vote of censure. In any event, it, adds, Mr Baldwin on his closing speech in tho debate will make the matter one of confidence, and despite tlie number of Conservative abstentions from the division the result will be a great majority for the Government. IMPORTANT STATEMENT EXPECTED In the House of Commons the Prime Minister announced that tlie motion for the Christmas adjournment would he taken on Friday. The House would meet again on Tuesday, 4th February, but the usual provision would be made for the House to be summoned at an earlier date if necessary.

Parliamentary interest now centres on to-morrow’s debate, in which Sir Samuel Iloare will make his first speech since his meeting with M. Laval in Paris. It is probable that the 11 o’clock rule will ho suspended to allow the Prime Minister, who will wind up the debate for the Government, full time for what is expected to be a very important statement. ABYSSINIAN NOTE PRINCIPLES OF COVENANT VIOLATED justice soleTfoundation of PEACE (Received 19th December, 12.50 a.m.) GENEVA, 18th December. An Abyssinian note published to-day will be handed to the British and French Ambassadors at Addis Ababa on 19th inst. It must not be regarded as a reply to tlie French and British suggestions; this will be sent later. Rome circles refuse to forecast Italy’s reply pending the result of the meeting of the Fascist Grand Council late tonight. The Abyssinian note challenges tlie League’s authorisation of anyone to prepare proposals and forward them to the parties to tlie dispute. It asks whether the Council did not reserve to itself the mediatory role, and implores the League to abide by the principle laid down in M. Herriot’s recent speech, that justice was the sole foundation of peace. It believes the League will refuse to admit the Paris suggestions, which violate the principles of the Covenant, and points out that even the most powerful member of the League would not be exempt from danger of attack if any other decision were reached. Haile Scilassie will tell the League of his decision only after the League has pronounced upon the French and British proposals.

PRESS OPINIONS COMING DEBATE IN COMMONS MUCH DEPENDS ON ISSUE LONDON, 17th December. The “Sun-Herald” agency says that not since 1914 has Parliament faced such a grave debate as that of next Thursday, nor an issue on which so much depends. The portfolios of Mr Baldwin and Sir Samuel Iloare are in the balance, and the future of Europe and the League may be influenced by tlie course of the debate. The agency understands that Sir Samuel Iloare will open the debate and immediately seek tlie confidence of the House ‘m tlie Government and himself; in other words, he will let the House decide whether he should resign. Mr Baldwin will uphold Sir Samuel Hoare, even to the extent of offering his own resignation. SIR SAMUEL HOARE’S POSITION The impresison still prevails that Sir Samuel Hoare’s speech on 19th December will largely follow the lines of M. Laval’s. Also, according to well-in-formed quarters, Sir Samuel Hoare is certainly not-, contrite, and will refer to M. Laval, confronting him with the warning from Signor Cerutti. Italian Ambassador at Paris, that oil sanctions would drive Signor Mussolini to mad dog action, while France would be unable to mobilise her navy in less than a fortnight. Sir Samuel Hoare may even indicate that an Italian attack on the fleet was imminent owing to the pressure of existing sanctions. Nevertheless, the Government will not ask the House to endorse all the details of the plan, although Mr Baldwin insists on making tlie issue one of confidence. Both tlie “Daily Telegraph” and the “Daily Mail” anticipate a lively debate when Cabinet re-examines the manner of conducting the defence, but senior Ministers have no doubt that Mr Baldwin will be able to convince his colleagues that no alternative was possible or even expedient. “The Times” Parliamentary Writer says that if the vote on 19th December is taken on a direct negative to the Labour motion many Government members will abstain. Members prefer voting on an amendment such as that- tabled by the group headed by Brigadier-General Spears, pronouncing the proposals unacceptable, and urging a resumption of the policy which the country overwhelmingly endorsed at the General Election, which would be heavily supported by Mr Eden at Geneva. Early statements of the British position indicated that there was no intention that the proposals should be imposed on the League and that if they were rejected the Council must taken the next step, as Britain is not anxious to make another effort without more definite indications of tlie lines of settlement acceptable to the League. Meanwhile, it is assumed that the next step will be an extension of economic pressure of Italy, in which Britain is still prepared to share collective action. Many members of the House of Commons feel that Sir Samuel Hoare cannot remain at tlie Foreign Office if the plan is defeated at Geneva; nevertheless, his colleagues do not desire his resignation. It is generally recognised that lie must be the sole judge of his own position.

PLAIN DECLARATION WANTED “The Times” in a leader asks: “How “How could Sir Samuel Iloare have thought the proposals would fulfil his own canon of being acceptable to Italy, Abyssinia, and the League? Why did Cabinet consider it must either endorse the proposals or repudiate Sir Samuel Iloare? The only answer which will secure a vote of confidence is a plain declaration that the proposals are not panicky or a reversal of policy, but simply a report to the League of the efforts to ascertain the terms, however unsatisfactory, on which negotiations can be begun, and not the British ideas of , what is just and practicable; also that j the Government intends collectively to resist aggression.” CAMPAIGN FOR REJECTION PLAN ALREADY DEAD (Received Ifitli December, 10.40 a.m.) LONDON. 18r.li December^ The Government is issuing a three : line whip, the most summary of all < mandates, ensuring that except in cases of serious illness, all Conser- :

vatives must vote on to-morrow’*, do hate.

“The Times” points out if it were possible for a vote to be' taken without intervention of whips there would be little doubt that a motion like the Labour Party’s would he earned in the present mood of the House of Commons. A noteworthy feature of the uproar, lias been the strong lead taken by “The Times” in tlie campaign for rejection of tlie plan, declaring that “It is already dead.” FRANCE AND OIL EMBARGO “The Times” Parliamentary correspondent makes tlie surprising announcement, in the light of M. Laval’s supposed earlier skeleton rattling/to frighten Sir Samuel Hoare, that MinM.crs were informed at yesterday’s Cabinet meeting that Franco has not yet stated her attitude towards the oil embargo.

STORMY SCENE IN CHAMBER POSTPONEMENT OF DEBATE M. LAVAL’S SPEECH PARIS, 17th December. After a stormy scene M. Laval secured by a majority of 54 a decision for tlie debate on foreign affairs to take place on 27th December instead of 20th December, as M. Blum suggested. M. Laval, replying to M. Cot’s demand not to enter into any engagement at Geneva without referring it to the Chamber, declared that he had no other policy than lie had stated in the morning, and lie refused to go to Geneva under humiliating conditions. SIGNIFICANT PHRASE LONDON, 17th December. The “Daily Herald” declares that the most significant phrase in M. Laval’s speech was “I rallied to the British diesis,” which it contends confirms the Labour view that the Baldwin Government is leading France towards betrayal of the League. “The Times” Paris correspondent states that but for fear of precipitating a crisis, and general reluctance to step into M. Laval’s highly, uncomfortable shoes, the Government would most likely have been defeated, while outside Parliament the speech has not altered the opinions of critics of M. Laval’s latest effort at peace-making, who question tlie assumption that his policy is the sole alternative to war. They are unable to see why France and Britain, after deciding against increasing the pressure on Italy, should have produced a disastrous although incomplete document, and also ask whether Signor Mussolini, after compelling the world to continue supplying oil to Italy, did not draw the obvious although erroneous conclusion that repetition of threats would remove the existing sanctions.

BITTER BLOW TO AUTHORITY AND PRESTIGE Both the “News-Chronicle” and the “Manchester Guardian’s” Paris correspondents state that M. Laval suffered a bitter blow to his authority and prestige and cannot go to Geneva claiming the support of the whole of France, as only 50 Radicals out of 156 voted for him, helping to stave off defeat. It was notable that M. Herriot did not applaud M. Laval’s speeches, while Radical Socialists cheered M. Blum’s attack. Moreover M. Cot, a Radical Socialist, declared that no member supported M. Laval s notorious peace move. The “News-Chronicle” in a leader emphasises that M. Laval made it clear it was before tlie ltalo-Abyssinian negotiations began that Britain and France agreed not to trv military sanctions. The “News-Chronicle” suggests that M Laval believed the oil embargo came under this category, and asks why, it Britain thought similarly, did the Committee of Enghteen with British and French concurrence, agree to an oil embargo in principle only six weeks ago. PROTESTS TO GENEVA FROM ROME AND ADDIS ABABA (Received 19th December, 10.40 LONDON, 18tli December . Almost coincidently two messages arrived, the first from Geneva recording Italy’s protest to the League against against tlie Abyssimans use o dum-dum bullets, “violating a high and universal humanitarian principle ; anc tho second from Addis Ababa announcing that international Red C oss investigators bad returned findin 0 that tlie bombing of the American hospital at Dessye was inexcusable The roof of the building was marked with a twenty foot Red Cross. MUSSOLINI DEFIANT UNCOMPROMISING SPEECH “WAR OF CIVILISATION AND LIBERATION” (Received 19tli December, 10.25 a.m.) ROME, 18tli December. Italy’s defiance of sanctions and determination to impose her will in East Africa were announced by bignoi Mussolini in the course of an uncompromising speech delivered in tlie new township Pontina. He saul: We won’t send tlie flower of our people to barbarous lands until we are certain they will be protected by tlie Italian tricolour. Italy is capable of resisting a long siege, confident in her power and tlie justice of her rights m a crooked Europe. Our destiny is staked in East Africa. Wc have begun a war of civilisation and liberation, a war of tlie poor and disinherited whom hypocrisy and egoism, oppose. e shall emerge victorious from tne decisive test. Right is on our mde and wrong on the other.” / . Even more significant is an unsigned aritcle in tlie “Popolo d’ltalia,” almost certainly written by Signoi Mussolini:

“The Fascist Grand Council may have something to say to old Europe this evening. Italy will never _be subdued by an imperialistic s J?jf e organised to help fifty states. The old discordant, decadent Europe has neither the energy, authority, nor moral right to 'subdue the Italian people.” CONDEMNATION OF PLAN AMERICAN REACTION NEW YORK, 17th December. While slow to crystallise or even to bo expressed, American reaction to the Hoare-Laval plan has finally taken I form. The amount of comment is surprisingly small, but it is from indicative sources. The main points are condemnation of tho plan “as a conqueror's peace,’’ the creation of a difficult position for America’s future cooperation with the League of Nations, and the need for further clarification ot American neutrality policy. Senator Borah calls tho incredible and says it would make “the League a subservient instrument of imperialism. Thank God, we are out of it,’’ The “New York Sun,” in a leader, says : “Only those who put their trust

sweetly in sentimental phraseology instead of the cold and often unpleasant truth should feel chagrin at the discovery that the dominant European Powers have indeed looked first . to what they believed to be their own interests, which are not the interests of the United States.” The “New York Times” emphasises that all is not yet known concerning the reasons for the plan, but that “public sentiment at once pronounced it both immoderate and impossible.” Mr Walter Lippman, the noted publicist, advances the interesting thought that we do not know the true explanation of the motives of the plan, but that its value must bo balanced against the cost of destroying Signor Mussolini “as one of tho pillars, fragile though it be, of the status quo in Central Europe.” DOMINIONS NOT CONSULTED PRIME MINISTER’S ADMISSION (Received 19t.1i December, 10.5 a.m.) LONDON, 18th December. In the House of Commons, Mr .Stanley Baldwin, asked whether tho Dominions were consulted before the peace terms were submitted to Italy and Abyssinia, answered: “No, but the dominions as far as possible were kept informed of the developments as they have arisen.”