MR EDEN TO EXPLAIN

Southland Times, Issue 23443, 25 February 1938, Page 7

MR EDEN TO EXPLAIN

ELECTORATE TO HEAR STORY FEELING OVER CRISIS STILL ROUSED SUSPICION OF POLITICAL INTRIGUE (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright) (Received February 24, 6.30 p.m.) LONDON, February 23. The Government is well satisfied with last night’s vote on the no-confidence motion, says the Australian Associated Press. The number of abstainers did not exceed expectations and the Ministers are today in a much easier frame of mind. The situation is much more satisfactory in the House of Commons but a long time will have elapsed before, the affair has settled down throughout the country. The Labour members’ rhetoric and bitterness, coupled with the public’s profound distaste for the manner of Mr Eden’S exit, will inevitably be capitalized throughout the country in a proEden, anti-Govemment campaign. The next move will occur when Mr Eden speaks in his constituency on

Friday; he will reveal many points he witnessed from the debate. It would be most interesting to have the inner history revealed because Mr Eden’s resignation is anything but devoid of subtle political intrigue. The Home Secretary (Sir Samuel Hoare), speaking at a luncheon held by the National Chamber of Trade in London, said that for months past Europe had seemed to be irrevocably splitting itself into two hostile camps, both of which were arming with feverish activity. In both alike there were very dangerous rumours of an inevitable clash. The British Government was not prepared to accept the inevitability of war. It did not believe that a catastrophe must come and it was determined to make a sustained effort to drive the haunting fear of war out of the hearts of men and women in Europe. It might fail in its attempt, but he asked the country to believe in its integrity. “This,” said Sir Samuel, “is no cowardly shady negotiation upon which we have embarked. It is an honest attempt to face the causes of difference and remove them with honour and justice to Both sides. .Nor is it in any sense a sacrifice of old friends. If we wish to make new friends there can be no question of abandoning old ones.” LABOUR’S CHALLENGE A manifesto issued after a meeting of the National Council of Labour states: The executives of the Labour Party, the Parliamentary Labour Party, and the Trades Union Council, called to consider the resignation of Mr Eden, challenge the Government to submit to the electorate the change which it alleges has been made in the Government’s foreign policy. The manifesto states that Mr Chamberlain and the majority of the Cabinet have disregarded the pledges upon which the National Government gained the nation’s confidence at the last general election, and that they have brought the League Covenant into derision. “They have abandoned the principles which have hitherto inspired the British people in their international relations. The Government has decided to enter upon negotiations with Italy under conditions which involve a betrayal of the friendship and confidence of the democratic nations. The Government refuses to make a stand in defence of international law. The Government’s policy imperils the security of the country and the Commonwealth.

“The British Labour movement reaffirms its uncompromising opposition to any agreement with either fascist Italy or Nazi Germany on the basis indicated by Mr Chamberlain in his statement to Parliament.” The conflicting views on questions raised by the resignation of Mr Eden are reflected in the newspapers’ comment. Support for the attitude taken by Mr Eden is confined almost entirely to the Opposition Press, but on all sides there is full recognition of the high conviction by which Mr Eden was guided.

The Times says: "The British belief in the value of publicity as a political safeguard has been fortified during the past two days. The full, frank debate in which the House of Commons investigated the origins of the disagreement between Mr Eden and his colleagues has now largely restored a sense of proportion. It has been an elementary vindication of the institution of Parliament. Nothing has been glossed over or hushed up. Criticism is free, and the critics will continue to be heard. “But the world has no excuse for misconceiving the event, which means no more, at bottom, than that the British Government, while faithful to its friendships and principles, will devote new energy to a thorough test of what may be done by more positive diplomacy for the elimination of the causes of international suspicion and hostility. The, conversations with Italy are no rebuff to the League nor in any sense a disservice to it.”