Nelson Evening Mail WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 10, 1940 MR CHAMBERLAIN’S HISTORIC SPEECH

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXIII, 10 January 1940, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 10, 1940 MR CHAMBERLAIN’S HISTORIC SPEECH

IT was fitting that Mr Chamberlain’s statesmanlike review of the war in the early hours of this morning (New Zealand time), should have been given in the historic Mansion House so intimately associated with the civic life of London, the very heart of the British Empire which, with great unity of purpose, is rallying to defend its freedom. There, in that chamber which is rich in association in the minds of all Englishmen, Mr Chamberlain had about him the bonds of Empire and the strength of a united nation. To its memories of freedom he added friendship and cooperation with the great neighbouring country, and he looked upon this as the forerunner of a still wider unity and a greater harbinger of peace in future years. Everything, said the Prime Minister, is subordinated to one | great purpose, everything else is subordinate to bringing the war to a successful conclusion and, with obvious reference to recent Cabinet changes, all personal feelings and considerations whatsoever. “I will not be deflected from that purpose or shrink from the inevitable responsibility to do what I think right.” It was fitting, he said, that his first public utterance of the New Year should be made in the heart of the Empire —an Empire, which every day wa3 rallying to do battle in the cause of liberty and justice for all mankind. Not only had the Dominions afforded most welcome additions to the striking strength of the nation, but wbat perhaps seemed to appeal to him most was that Britain* was conscious of unanimous support.

Mr Chamberlain warned the nation that the present quiet was merely a lull before the storm. On the sea they could discern most clearly the shape hostilities would take. Britain’s command of the sea remained unimpaired. Not only had the naval action against the Graf Spee been “one of the finest in all our history,’’ but the act of self destruction rather than fight again, had cleared the South Atlantic an irreparable damage to German naval prestige. In some striking passages Mr Chamberlain graphically depicted German brute force against the weaker nations—how she was treating the Poles, shooting the people, uprooting and separating them from their homes, people who had been forced to leave the land on which they had lived for generations. Then it was Finland’s turn and she was fighting against unscruplous violence, fighting for the same things—liberty and justice as the British nation was fighting for. The Prime Minister added that Britain’s response to the appeal at Geneva would be no mere formality. Reference was made to the trials of Turkey under earthquake and flood and of the aid France and Britain were prepared to render. “I cannot help thinking,’’ said Mr Chamberlain, “that our experiences in our association with France during the war will be such that we will not want to give it up and that we might easily widen it because there is nothing which would do more towards the permanence of peace.’’ Great emphasis was placed by Mr Chamberlain on what he termed the attitude of the nation towards the war. No people or nation was more determined or more patriotic, but he was not so sure the people realised “what they were up against,” and these remarks apply perhaps more to the distant Dominions than to (he people of Great Britain. Then followed a masterly exposition of the change over to war production and a confident appeal was made for the fullest co-operation of all the people. Gradually production must change from production of ordinary goods to production of the sinews of war. Further, war materials were only partly produced in Britain, and for purchases abroad, payment had to be made either in gold, sale of securities, or exports of goods and services.

We hove therefore got to increase our exports as much as we con and diminish our imports of what we can do without. Mr Chamberlain warned his hearers that this meant sacrifices all round, but what, he asked, were those sacrifices compared with those of the men serving on sea, land and in the air. Taxes had been increased, almost to constitute conscription of wealth. On the other hand, every possible step had been taken to prevent unreasonable profiting. Further, measures had been taken in regard to food commodities and imports so that all would share and share alike. An appeal was made for redoubling of efforts in the interests of national security. There was no reason to suppose that the country would go short of anything necessary for health or efficiency, but, said Mr Chamberlain, the Government is trying to show that a democracy can, with the assent of the people,

carry out all plans necessary to victory. It is no easy task to bring together all the factors involved in the purchase of only the required goods from overseas, to provide sufficient exports to pay for imports, to control production in , Great Britain and to regulate prices. It was impossible, Mr Chamberlain said, to ensure that the sacrifices of all would be equal, “but if each person accepts his part they would see it through.” Striking reference was made to Germany’s long-planned conflict with its successive stages the ultimate objective the ruination of the British Empire. It was, he said, for the German people to realise that prolongation of the war and all the suffering entailed were their responsibility as well as the responsibility of those who stood over them. Mr Chamberlain did not overlook the value of the moral support for the Allied cause from the Americas and he left his hearers with the inspiring thought that at the beginning of the New Year the nation stood with un- | shaken confidence in the strength of its arms and in the righteousness of its cause.