NO SURPRISE IN AMERICA

Southland Times, Issue 23444, 26 February 1938, Page 7

NO SURPRISE IN AMERICA

. RESIGNATION OF MR EDEN “Realistic” Groups Not Sorry POSSIBLE ACTION IN FAR EAST i JOINT MOVE BY BRITAIN AND UNITED STATES (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright) (Received February 25, 9.50 p.m.) WASHINGTON, February 25. Careful inquiries among high Government officials responsible for the foreign policy of the United States convinces the correspondent of the Australian Associated Press that the immediate effect of the resignation of Mr R. A. Eden as Foreign Secretary has been to strengthen the hands of the “isolationists,” but probably it has not affected the United States long-range view. The more realistic groups in the State Department can be said not to have been surprised at Mr Eden’s resignation, but they are not a little surprised at the time it came. It can also be said that the “realistic” groups are not sorry over his leave-taking, not because they do not sympathize with his viewpoint, but because the strong “isolationists” here are extremely suspicious of his efforts, alleging that they are designed or destined to involve the United States in foreign entanglements. These “isolationists” have proved the greatest single force of interference with the State Department’s conduct of American foreign affairs.

The position of the President (Mr Franklin D. Roosevelt) is described as something in the nature of an umpire. It can now be said that the concepts of his speech in Chicago on the quarantining of aggressor nations have not been acceptable to the bulk of American opinion and that they have been abandoned by the President himself. It is emphasized that Mr Roosevelt is trying to keep the door open to both schools of his advisers, the “isolationists” and the “parallel actionists.” STATE DEPARTMENT’S VIEW The State Department may be inclined to dislike seeing Britain negotiating with the dictator Powers, but it is hardly unwilling to accept the benefits, if any, that arise from the situation. It is felt that Britain, if she is freed from her Mediterranean pre-occupa-tions, is likely to make a definite gesture in the Far East. Some quarters think that this possibly may take the form of stationing half a dozen battleships at Singapore as a token of her determination to make redress for the position in the Pacific. Such a move would immeasurably strengthen the “parallel actionists” here and it even emphasizes that the success of the Anglo-Italian negotiations would automatically prove a restraining influence upon the military clique in Japan. The best-infonned circles here are completely convinced that any action, either by England or America, in the Far East would necessarily be parallel. Considerable interest has been aroused here by Herr Hitler’s references last Sunday to the Pacific and diplomatic circles interpret his remarks to mean that he is not aiming at New Guinea, as well as assuring Japan that he does not aim at her mandates. STRICT CONTROL BY MR CHAMBERLAIN AUTHORITY CENTRED IN DOWNING STREET LONDON, February 24. The Australian Associated Press savs that it is more evident every minute that the Prime Minister (Mr Neville Chamberlain) is concentrating around himself a control more exclusive than anything hitherto achieved under what is British constitutional government. Henceforth is may be found that all policy will be bom in No. 10 Downing Street, as distinct from the respective Government departments. Mr Chamberlain will be the Government and his Cabinet colleagues may be little more than conventional subordinates. The bearing of this on Anglo-Dominion relations cannot, be exaggerated because, however divergent are the views on Mr Eden’s policy, nobody denies that he made possible a steady and consistent interpretation abroad. He spread frankness between the Foreign Office, the public of Britain, and the Dominions, making it possible for the newspapers to keep the public and the Dominions abreast of policy, whereas all this is now threatened with curtailment if not extinction. Mr Chamberlain informed the House of Commons at question time that his pledge not to introduce conscription in peace-time applied to compulsory service, both military and civil. In reply to a question by the Leader of the Opposition (Major C. R. Attlee), Mr Chamberlain stated that the Foreign Office questions should be addressed to him until the new Foreign Secretary was appointed. It is reported that the Conservative Foreign Affairs Parliamentary Committee met this evening and expressed wholehearted support of Mr Chamberlain’s policy The offer of resignation on the part of officers of the committee because of the abstention of two of them from the division on the Opposition’s note of censure in the* House of Commons was not accepted. The Rome correspondent of the British United Press quotes an authoritative source as stating that Lady Chamberlain, widow of Sir Austen Chamberlain, had several talks with Signor Mussolini and the Italian Foreign Minister (Count Galeazzo Ciano). It is understood that she wrote assuring Mr Chamberlain that Italy had no aggressive and no destructive designs against Britain. On the contrary, Signor Mussolini desired better relations with Britain on the basis of a mutual recognition of the vital but conflicting interests of the two countries.

SOUTH AFRICAN PRIME MINISTER’S SUPPORT CAPE TOWN, February 24. Expressing complete confidence in the Prime Minister of Britain (Mr Neville Chamberlain), General J. B. M. Hertzog, Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa, said: “Mr Chamberlain has my full support in his policy and in the method in which he is executing it.”

MR CHAMBERLAIN CRITICIZED AMERICANS ALLEGE DOUBLE-CROSSING DECISION “TO GO ALONG WITH DICTATORS” (United Press Assn.— Telegraph Copyright) (Received February 25, 5.5 p.m.) WASHINGTON, February 25. Mr Maury Maverick, a Democrat member of the House of Representatives, at the naval hearing, alleged that the Administration was keeping secret reports from the army showing the vulnerability of battleships to attack from the air, because it was committed to the construction of capital ships. “We have no need to worry about Herr Hitler, because he wont come over here,” he said, but if he does we already have a good army and navy.” ~ Mr H P. Koppleman (Democrat) said that Mr Neville Chamberlain double-crossed the United States when he decided to go along with the dictators. Mr T. D. O’Malley (Democrat) asserted that Britain was moulding the United States’s policies. “Downing Street was a shirt tail brigade—our own State Department,” he said. He expressed the opinion that developments about Herr Hitler and Mr R. A. Eden diminished the need for an increased fleet.

ITALIAN AMBASSADOR LEAVING FOR ROME TALKS ON WITHDRAWAL OF VOLUNTEERS FROM SPAIN (British Official Wireless) RUGBY, February 24. The Italian Ambassador (Count Dino Grandi) will leave London during the week-end to attend the Fascist Grand Council in Rome. .Yesterday he discussed with the Earl of Plymouth, chairman of the Non-Intervention. Commit'tee, the British proposals for the withdrawal of volunteers from Spain and the granting of belligerent rights. Lord Plymouth also saw the French Ambassador (M. Charles Corbin), and, it is understood, will interview the ambassadors of the other chief powers within the next few days. The talks with Italy and Mr R. A. Eden’s resignation were referred to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir John Simon) in a speech at Birmingham. He expressed the hope that the loss of Mr Eden was only temporary. As to the cause of his resignation, he said that the rest of the Cabinet had at no time been conscious of the existence of any such fundamental divergence of view between Mr Chamberlain and Mr Eden as the words of the latter would suggest. They had all worked together on terms of close cordiality and the broad objects of their policy were the objects of them all. There was no difference whatever on the question of the desirability of conversations with Italy. The immediate issue was the question of time and place. Mr Eden’s departure was a cause of the deepest regret and to some of them the cause was bewildering. Sir John Simon contended that Mr Chamberlain’s policy would appeal to the people of because it was a positive policy and its justification did not depend on the result of conversations.