FOREIGN POLICY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23504, 19 May 1938, Page 11

FOREIGN POLICY

OPINION DIVIDED IN BRITAIN LONDON, May 9. In spite of what has been said to the contrary, the loss of the Lichfield seat to Labour in the recent by-election is disturbing the Prime Minister (Mr Chamberlain) and his supporters, for the Liberal vote went largely to Labour. Lichfield is regarded as an interesting cross-section of the electorate, containing as it does, mining, agricultural, and residential sections: Even the Daily Telegraph notes " its significance is a reverse for the Government." As in the cases of West Fulham and Ipswich, the Lichfield campaign was fought out principally on the acceptability of Mr Chamberlain's " new method" of foreign policy, which, it may be said, divides the public into three sections—those who regard it with astonishment or disgust, since they believe that, in spite of Mr Chamberlain's protests to the contrary, it involves not only a new method, but the abandonment of a principle;, those who consider it unpleasant but necessary; and those who believe it may lead to general European appeasement for some time, and therefore cannot be either astonishing, unnecessary, unpleasant, or disgusting, but realistic.

Mr Chamberlain's making of sixminute talkies in order to put the Government's case to the nation through the kinemas, and the results of the West Fulham, Ipswich, and Lichfield by-elections, suggest that the nation is far from being whole-heartedly behind him, but only about evenly divided. A isit to Lichfield would satisfy a visitor that that electorate does not want a Labour Government, and that the only acceptable alternative at the moment is a coalition of Liberals. Labour and Independents. At present Labour refuses to co-operate with the Liberals, with the result that where there is a close threecorner fight, the Conservatives are likely to win from the split voting.