The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING “LUCEO NON URO” THURSDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1937. A Domestic Crisis In Belgium

Southland Times, Issue 23342, 28 October 1937, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING “LUCEO NON URO” THURSDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1937. A Domestic Crisis In Belgium

The resignation of the Belgian Cabinet, reported in a cable message yesterday, indicated th*& the crisis which was looming two months ago was not averted, but merely postponed. At that time the Prime Minister, M. van Zeeland, was.charged with accepting funds from the National Bank after he had ended his connection with it and had become a member of the Cabinet. It was obvious that the Rexists and their allies among the Flemish Nationalists were leading the attack. The leaders of both these political groups—M. Degrelle and M. van Dieren respectively—were present at an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders of the National Bank when the matter was brought to a head. They had gained admission by depositing the required number of shares, and their presence may have been one reason why the meeting was particularly stormy. The charges against M. van Zeeland, however, were not new. Allegations of a slightly different kind, but referring to the Prime Minister’s connection with the National Bank, were made in the first place in Parliament by M. Gustave Sap, a former Minister of Finance; and since then the matter has received a great deal of attention in the newspapers. It is scarcely surprising if the Rexists have done what they can to enlarge the business into a first-class political scandal. But it seemed as if their attempts were failing. At a special session of Parliament the Prime Minister was acquitted of the charges. His defence, which was reported in The Times, London, was a direct denial that he had acted improperly, and at the same time a vigorous outburst against his critics.

While I was Prime Minister (he said) I did not receive the smallest sum from the bank. It was a practice of the bank’s to set aside from its resources a common fund for the directors. On whether this system was good or bad it is not for me to express a judgment. The Government has unanimously decided to abolish it. . . . When the King charged me with the formation of a Ministry I broke off all ties with the bank. The governor of the bank remitted to me my part, amounting to 180,000 f., of the common fund. Thus was the last tie broken. ...

The Chamber votes in favour of M. van Zeeland were 130 to 34, and in the Senate the voting was 121 to 6. Cordial references were made to the Prime Minister’s “integrity and disinterestedness”, and although the Rexist newspapers protested indignantly the country showed every sign of settling down. But the latest cables show the situation in a different light. M. van Zeeland stated in a broadcast address that he had resigned because of a “campaign of calumny against the unity of the Government, against which it was impossible to work successfully.” This time, however, the attack has had its accompaniment of dramatic incident. Allegations have been made against dealings between the National Bank and the Goldsiziemer and Penso Bank, and it has been reported that a director of this latter bank was found dead under circumstances which point to suicide. A further report stated that several bank officials “are at present before the Correctional Court.” Until more definite news is available there can be little profit in speculating on the nature of the “financial difficulties” mentioned in yesterday’s cable message. The one certainty is that if there is to be any kind of a financial scandal the Opposition forces will make the utmost use of it for political ends. It could be assumed that the Rexists’ immediate purpose has been achieved with the resignation of the Cabinet; but recent history gives reason to suppose that this may not be much more than a gesture. M. van Zeeland has already resigned at least four times, and on every occasion it was found that he had become indispensable. In less than three years he has guided Belgium through financial and economic troubles (his first move was to devalue the currency), through industrial upheavals culminating in strikes and rioting, and through a series of political crises engineered by a fascist Opposition. His influence can be traced also in the diplomatic tactics which led to the April Declaration of 1936 and the subsequent neutrality agreements with Britain, France and Germany. In addition to these activities he has found time and energy to accept an invitation from the British and French Governments to investigate the possibilities of a less restricted movement in international trade, and to carry through his inquiries with characteristic thoroughness. His reputation stands high in Europe, and it is difficult to see where the King could find a man of equal ability for a complex and responsible task. This may be the deciding factor in the present situation.