RUSSIAN BOMBSHELL

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXXIV, Issue 4, 28 October 1924, Page 5

RUSSIAN BOMBSHELL

ALLEGED FORGED DOCUMENT BRITISH ELECTION SENSATION. SOVIET DEMANDS APOLOGY. Pres* Association—Copyright, Australian and N.Z, Cable Association. London, October 27. The explosion on the Russian bombshell continues to (reverberate through jut the entire electoral field, though the -Moscow allegation that the Zinovieff letter is a. forgery and demanding an, apology from Britain .mutes in© l>iiiiy rteraid claim that the bombshell has now become a djamp squib. in any case Mr Ramsay MacDonald’s personal position is most difficult. The situation lends 1 intense interest to the speech which Mr MacDonald promises to-day at Cardiff, in which he will discuss the whole matter. ■

The Daily Herald’s political correspondent states that the British Note was to M. Rakovsky and a copy/ sent to the Press without either Mr MacDonald or Mr Porsonby being consulted, but other newspapers state that Mr MacDonald drafted the reply himself. The Daily Herald adds that the Zinovieff letter was concoctc)d (by a “white” organisation in Russia and the Foreign Office experts accepted it without an adequate critical examination.

SOVIET’S STRONG DENIALS.

“CROSS FALSIFICATION.”

FOREIGN OFFICE SATISFIED (Reuter.) (Reoeived 8.40 a.m.) London, October 27, Mr Zinovieff sent a message to the Trades Union Congress, declaring that the) letter alleged to be signed by him is a gross falsification. There was not and could not be such a letter. He denounced it as clearly an election maneuver© and invites the Trades Union Congress to appoint a commission to visit Russia to investigate its authenticity. Notwithstanding the Communist denials, the Foreign Office is entirely satisfied with the gennihess of the letter, Mi- Radovsky sent the letter to the Foreign Office, protesting that his Embassy was not - notified prior to its publication, and declaring that th© letter was obviously a forgery, which should have been dear to the Foreign Office officials. POLITICAL PARTY ISSUES. The Conservative headquarters today state that they are convinced the Zinovieff correspondent , will \-(vljy many wAverers to the Conservative side., .

Liberal headquarters are of opinion that there is grave peril' of reaction aftqr such an ©xplosaire, and- only Liberalism can save the Nation. BRITISH APOLOGY DEMANDED. FRIENDLY RELATIONS STRAINED. Press Association—Copyright, Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. (Received 8.45 a.m.) Mdscow, October 27.

The Soviet’s reply to the British Note characterises the alleged Zinovieff letter as an impudent forgery, aiming at the destruction of the An-glo-Soviet Treaty, and the ruin, of. friendly Anglo-Soviet relations, which happily are beginning to improve. 'ln view of the use of forgery in an official document, the Soviet Government insists on an* adequate apology, and the punishment of both private and official persons, and concludes: “Frilly a P" preciating the serious consequences the forgery might have on l*>th countries, the Soviet urgently, and decidedly offers to recognise- an iin- * partial arbitration court to establish, the fact that the letter is a forgery.’’ * The Note opens by adhering to the repeated declarations regarding the non-responsibility of the Soviet Government for the act of the Communist International, and at' present abstains from touching upon the form and tone of the Foreign Office Note.

BRITISH LABOR PAPER RECALLS 1921 INCIDENT.

SECRET SERVICE HOAXED.

Press Association—Copyright, Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. (Received 9.20 a.m.) London, October 27.

The “Daily Herald’’ insists that the Zinovieff letter is an obvious forgery. The Herald’s Parliamentary correspondent points out that Foreign Office experts were similarly deceived in 1921. resulting in Lord Ourzon’s famous Note to Russia, dated September 7th, which vrag afterwards discovered to be founded on forged documents supplied by German private detectives.

The correspondent suggests that the Zinovieff letter is probably the work of Russian counter-revolution-aries, obtained in Russia by the British secret service.

WARNING TO FRANCE. FRENCH PRESS COMMENT. (Received 9.20 a.m.) Paris, October 27. Tu view of the expected French recognition of the Soviet; the press i iS devoting great space to tlie Zinovieff incident, suggesting that it should give M. Herriot a pause.

SENSATION IN ITALY. ATTACK ON CIVILISATION. (Received 9.20 a.m.) ’ Home, October 27. The publication of Zinovieff’s letter caused a sensation in Italy; Officials regard the Communist agitation in Britain, coinciding with increased activity in Italy and elsewhere in Europe, as a symptom of Moscow’s organised renewed attack on civilisation. The Italian Bolshevicks recently received large funds, enabling a renewal of propaganda, which was dropped after Mussolini attained power. BRITISH LABORITES ALARMED. SPLIT IN THE PARTY. (Sun Cable). (Received 9.80 a.m.) London; October 27.

Reports from many areas throughout, the country suggest that the Laborites. who.-abhor revolution ami who supported the Government's attitude towards Russia, on economic grounds, are profoundly; disturbed over the Zinovieff revelations. A REVOLUTION IN GERMANY FORECASTED. (Reuter). (Received 9.20 a.m.) Riga, October 27.

In connection with the celebration of the anniversary of the Communist outbreak at Hamburg last year, M. Zinovieff declared that a proletarian revolution is approaching in Germany despite all the Dawes, Eberts and Noskes. The Hamburg rising was a Communist dross rehearsal.